Darth Wong's Israel bashing

[Wicked Pilot]

Here's my solution:

Tell them they're both a bunch of assholes

Tell them the Old Testimate is old tribal bullshit

Tell them they can both go fuck themselves

Cut all their funding

Tell the Palestenians that if they ever blow up one of our airliners again, we bomb the crap out of them.

Tell the Israelis that if they ever attack one of our naval ships again, we will bomb the crap out of them.

Tell them that if they are ever legitimately interested in peace, however unlikely that is, we will do what we can to help along the process is they ask.

Other than that, let God sort them out. I'm sick of this shit.

[lgot]

If the one side covered in article is correct, then there is no problem. Actually the biggest problem is this kind of politic "I am wrong, because he is wrong, blablabla, 40 years ago".

Now and then,
Everyone knew that the pacification process was slowly walking until the elections that put a more radical leader in the power. It was israel mindset who changed it "So a small terrorist group did something. So bad Arafat, remember that Nobel you won time ago, It was for nothing. All work of representation of state that is not allowed to exist, therefore cannt be mechanisms of control and law to punish their members is done"

PLus, Israel is the strong side. Israel is the one who get "patpats" from USA and have real militar power. It is from There that changes may come from, because change come from those who have real power. They instead wnat to use this power to control the palestines not to bring the peace back. That is why is more important the talk to Israel, not to the palestines. Once the brainwashing they do with their youths (We must join the army to defend our home because any day we can lost it. As it) and they learn to see the mistakes of both sides, the radical side of Israel will lost power and then will be last only to show it to the other, already in rags side.

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

ramblings...

Instead of trying to 'flood' out more shaky information why not try to do a true analysis of both parties, put everything in perspective, and offer solutions. It would be much more effective and informative than a hit piece propaganda article..

Au contraire, the article is mostly a "corrective" article. One who's main purpose is to correct what he perceives (based on what HE knows and infers) as myths, so people can have a more "fair" look at the land.

"The True Nature of Israel" - informative/argumentative. Tells us what he thinks about Israel. It isn't very positive, but given the facts he seems to have, who can have a good impression? If you want to change that, try providing more facts.

"History of Israeli Military Aggression" - mostly corrective. He tries to dispel the Israeli defensive myth. If the correct facts about this one don't favor Israel, Wong can do nothing but present them.

"Myths" - The myths on the left, the facts (as he knows them at least) on the right. Attacks the myths in turn. Definitely corrective. The fact that the correction may not be favorable to Israel does not change that fact.

"Israel's Enemies" - informative/argumentative. Tells us what he thinks about the Arabs, the Terrorists ... etc. It definitely isn't much more complimentary than "The True Nature of Israel."

"Events of 2002" - informative/argumentative. Now he criticizes America, and shows an example "The True Nature of Israel in Action."

"Bad Solutions" - criticism. Why the standardized solutions don't work.

"Radical solutions" - hey, who said that he never proposed an idea? Oh yeah, you. There it is. It is a nice solution, but it is too idealistic to have a real chance, and he knows it.

If you don't count the corrections (which is really pumping out water,) then in fact the two sides aren't done too unevenly. There were six paragraphs pummeling Israel and five pummeling the Arabs - neither was very friendly.

If I walk into a Trekkie infested (almost DarkStar class) board and post my views in detail, I might have to spend pages just trying to debunk myths like the "1.5C myth" and the "Outrageous Okona" myth. Then I'll put a summary about my views on Imperial strengths and a summary about the views on Federation strengths. But if you count all my myth stuff (a lot of the myths benefit Trek in SW-ST crossovers, and thus reality likely won't) into my pro-Imperial section, it'll sound like I'm not saying very many good things about the Federation.

(Damn, clicked submit too fast)

But that is not true. I spent equal time on each. It is just the myths...

Another thing this analogy shows is that sometimes, it is impossible to look fair, when one side is clearer superior.

[Falcon]

Its amazing how someone can write whole paragraphs and yet say so little...

[Kazuaki Shimazaki]

Considering how intent you seem to be on attacking anyone that tries to defend that essay.

[Falcon]

I just didn't like the seemingly one sided stance of the essy, and I don't think Israel is as bad as it was made out to be. You know it is possible to be factually correct and present those facts in a misleading way. The arabian states are not pretty places, they go against the very human rights that Israel is supposedly violating. I don't want us to beat up one side (Israel) to the point that we get something worse.

[Majin Gojira]

I say it because of what I learnedin History. It was made for 2 reasons: an apology for all the jews killed by hitler, and a place for them to go now that their homes were destroyed. so, they grabbed land from where Israel used to be, and gave it to them. completely ignoring the fact that people were currently living their.

Tell me that's not stupid.

Not only is that not stupid, it's wrong. A Jewish state was forming in that area since 1882 when the first Aliyah began. At first the Jews bought, note, that's bought not stole, empty land. Then when there was no more of that, they legally purchased land from the owners. Since that's well before Hitler came into power it has very little to do with him.

In 1917 and area, which was controlled by the British and not the Arabs, was divided into two countries Transjordan for the Arabs and Palestine for the Jews. The Jews got 23% of the land, much of which was desert. Remember, this in 1917, still nothing to do with Hitler.

After Anti-Jewish riots and WWII (where the Jews fought for the Allies and the Arabs publicly praised Hilter for trying to exterminate the Jews), the land was divided again, this time the Jews got 55% of what was left, or roughly 12% of the original figure. But you only hear 55%. Some freak out saying that the Jews were only 30% of the population and 6% of the land owners, but the division wasn't based on the number of Jews there, but the number of Jews that would be there if Israel was formed. And guess what? More Jews moved to Israel, or should fled to Israel than Arabs who fled away. And Israel even offered to compensate those Arabs, under the condition that Arab countries compensated Jews who lost homes, property, etc. when they left. The Arabs refused, but the lack of compensation is still brought up as a reason Israel is wrong.

Well, just goes to show how much attention I payed in that class, didn't it.

[Darth Wong]

I just didn't like the seemingly one sided stance of the essy, and I don't think Israel is as bad as it was made out to be.

Of course not. They're wonderful little angels, who just happen to enjoy thumbing their nose at the Geneva Convention, shooting to kill even when the target is a child, bulldozing thousands of homes to make way for the Glory of the Jewish Homeland, setting up a giant apartheid race-ghetto called the "occupied territories" where Jews can vote but Palestinians can't even get free access to fresh water, etc.

You know it is possible to be factually correct and present those facts in a misleading way.

Which is precisely what CNN does every day. Silly me, trying to oppose that unstoppable tide of propaganda by pointing out the things that CNN would rather not mention.

The arabian states are not pretty places, they go against the very human rights that Israel is supposedly violating. I don't want us to beat up one side (Israel) to the point that we get something worse.

Who said anything about beating them up? I'm just talking about not sending them billions of dollars of military hardware and economic aid. They have the money, they have the military power, they hold all the cards. They've played their Holocaust victim-card to the hilt, and then some. But the fact is that they are firmly in control, and the people who scream that they would be instantly overrun by screaming Arabs without our help are being lunatics. Let them deal with the Palestinians without giving them a free sabre to rattle.

[NecronLord]

Flip side: Palestinians have offered to make peace, but peace looks a lot like the destruction of the Israeli nation, therefor it is OK to blow up as many Jews as possible with suicide bombers...

Destroying a nation that wants to exclude everyone else and become a nation only for people of a certain religion?! That's horrible!

Also, Israel is one of the most secular nations as this comparison chart

Isreal is the only middle eastern nation on there.

[Sokar]

If its one thing sure to stir the shit pail , if talking about the Middle East.....

That said, lets give it a swish, I'm a firm supporter of the points made in Mikes essay on Israel. They are an agressive , brutal and opressive racict state that is mantained only as long as it has the force of arms to do so. However I've just described 90% of the nations on the planet......we all live in little armed camps we like to call nations, but in the end all of thoes nations are predicated on the application of violence for their continued existence , and in almost all cases for their formation as a nation state. Israel though is the product of a harsh history lesson provided ala the Nazi's, and thousands of Slavic and European atrocities aginst Jews before the Holocaust, that eiether you have a nation, replete with all that entails and you victimize someone(in this case the local Arabs and Palestinians, whos ancestors by the way had evicted both the Jews and than later the Christian Lords of Jerusalem to claim the land for themselves) or you are the victim. In national life spans Israel is still an infant , and hasn't had time to fully pacify its territories and exterminate or absorbe its opponents. Israel is just doing what Americans did to the Indians a century ago, and in another hundred years if Israel is still a part of the map, they will talk about the tragic destruction of the Palestinian culture and historians will write sad selfserving books all about the subject.
the notion of a peaceful solution is a wonderful political ideal, but in our world of the sovreign nation state, it in the end all comes down to force and annihilation for one side or the other.

In this conflict then it is necessary for us to chose sides , oh our leaders pay lip service to the notion that we will be impartial and help to bring about a peaceful solution, but in reality we always choose sides. The US made its decision long ago that we would support Israel. Billions of dollars in economic and military aid are funneled into Israel every year by the US govt. But at any time in order to force a settlement do we ever dare to suggest that maybe Israel should fund its own armed forces out of its own budget? Impossible, without American dollars to pay its army and propup its economy , Israel folds like a house of cards, what do you really think a nation the size of Massachusetts(You can drive across Israel from the ocean to the Jordanian or Syrian Border in little more than an hour) has a tax base large enough to pay and maintain all that hardware that they have ? Thats that in a nut shell, Israel plays by the rules we all have allowed to take shape in our world, this dosent excuse our actions or therir or even thoes of the Palestinians, its just the way the game works.

[Superman]

BWAAHAHAAHA

The guy that started this, his name is... (holding in laughter) NIXON! Bwaahahaha

And he even has a little picture of Nixon after his name! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


"I am not a crook"


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Sokar]

Bodger off noob.......we were haveing a discussion, now go play and let the adults chat.........

[The_Nice_Guy]

Wasn't there an agreement hammered out by Bill Clinton sometime in the nineties that allowed the Palestinians to get 95% of what they were fighting for? Statehood, territory, a government of their own, and all that?

According to that same story, Arafat walked away without signing the treaty, which the Israelis were willing to give to him. I would think that Arafat should have signed the treaty, and then engaged the Israelis peacefully for the remaining 5%. But he was said to have walked away.

Anybody want to talk about this?

I think both sides are wrong in many ways, but in a lot of cases, it's the a$$holes at the top on both sides making it worse. The palestinians should have gotten rid of Arafat a long time ago. He's killing their credibility. That man is a known liar and he just cannot be negotiated with in good faith.

For the Israelis, they should get somebody like Yitzak Rabin to get the peace process back on track. Unfortunately, the present climate means that it's going to be impossible, for Israel will go for 'security at any cost' first before talking peace.

The Nice Guy

[Vympel]

Wasn't there an agreement hammered out by Bill Clinton sometime in the nineties that allowed the Palestinians to get 95% of what they were fighting for? Statehood, territory, a government of their own, and all that?

It's a bullshit lie that's often repeated on Fox News. This supposed 95% didn't include the Dead Sea, ANY of the settlement areas, or the Jerusalem area which alone comprises 25% of the West Bank.

The reality of this so called 'generous' offer was three bantustans in the West Bank and one in Gaza, seperated by settlements annexed to Israel, Israel would've kept the Jordan Valley for 12 years, there would have been no real Palestinian sovereignty in Jerusalem, and for the final insult, all the borders would be controlled by Israel. In return, the Palestians would give up on the refugee issue and agree that the conflict was 'resolved'.

[Sir Sirius]

Falcon your entire arqument is based vilifying the Palestinians by labeling all of them as terrorists to de-humanize them, so that you can justify Israel's racist apartheid policies and continued oppression of the palestinians. Now you can dress that anyway you wan't, it will not change the fact that the basic arqument it self is inherently racist.

What, like the vast majority of Southerners wern't Confederates, or the vast number of Russians wern't Soviets, or the vast numbers of Germans wern't Nazis?

Now you are confusing political allingment and even nationality with being a terrorist. If you don't see the error in that I really don't know what to say.

Guess what, we bombed Germany into a ash heap[1], Sherman burned Georgia to the ground[2], America starved and spent the Soviets into oblivian[3].

[1]Which was wrong, [2]Which was wrong, [3]So the Soviet union was dumb for ever getting in to that race, but all of this is irrelevant, what someone did in the past does not justify what Israel is doing today.

Those terrorists wouldn't be there if not for the support of the general public, it doesn't matter if each and every one of them picks up a gun, what matters is that the aid and comfort is drawn from the Palestinian people.

And yet again you are labeling all Palestinians as terrorist supporters.

Thats absurd, my best friend is a Korean, I have many other friends and associates who are of various races including arabs. Of course you couldn't know that, but it shows just how blindedly biased you are to go around making assumptions about someone you've never met.

Having a Korean friend doesn't mean that you aren't a racists and I don't have to meet you to know that you are a racist, the numerous racist comments you have made in this thread are wholly sufficent prove of that.

I am certianly not making that distinction about an entire ethinic group, just those who are actively engaging in the acts of violence described.

But you are using the actions of some members of an ethnic group to justify the oppression of the entire ethnic group.

Just like we generalize about the Nazi's, the Soviets, the [insert group here]. Was every German in 1939 a Nazi? Of course not, but the entire German nation still got branded with the same label. Was every Japanese a supporter of the attack on Perl Harbor? Of course not, but they got put in internment camps just the same.

All of these generalizations were wrong, but that is wholly irrelevant, what someone did 60 odd years ago does not justify Israels actions today.
BTW are you seriously claiming that the the Japanese internment camps were all OK?

The innocent get swept along with the supporters and perpertrators of acts, the fault lies not with those who point out the group responsible, but with that group.

That they do, but the fault lies in those that label all the members of the group as perpetrators of those acts to justify the oppression of that group. What the terrorist and their supporters do does not justify the oppression of all Palestinians, you are now marely side-stepping the point in question.

You arguement thus far is that since not every single Palestinian is a terrorist(supporter) that we cannot talk about the general level of Palestinian support and involvement in terrorism. That won't hold water.

Straw man. My arqument is that you can NOT justify Israels racist apartheid policies and continued oppression of the Palestinians with the fact that some (a minute fraction) Palestinians are terroroists.

Tell me, how many non - Palestinian terrorists are involved in attacks on Israel? In World War II we used Nazi as a synonym for German, but no one had a fit over that.

There are Palestinian terrorists, but most (overwhelmingly vast majority of) Palestinians are NOT terrorists, you are YET again labeling all Palestinians as terrorists based on the actions some Palestinians. That is just as moronic, racists and evil as labeling all African-Americans as criminals because some African-Americans are criminals. And then you camplain when I call you a racist, LOL.
And yet again what someone did 60 odd years ago does not justify what Israel is doing to day.

[Falcon]

Falcon your entire arqument is based vilifying the Palestinians by labeling all of them as terrorists to de-humanize them, so that you can justify Israel's racist apartheid policies and continued oppression of the palestinians. Now you can dress that anyway you wan't, it will not change the fact that the basic arqument it self is inherently racist.

I'm not trying to justify ever action Israel has ever taken, but I also want to make sure that the Palestinians arn't made out to be hapless victims of Evil Tyrannical Oppression(tm)

Now you are confusing political allingment and even nationality with being a terrorist. If you don't see the error in that I really don't know what to say.

No I'm not, the analogy was this: Just because not every single person in a specific group believed in that group, doesn't mean that we cannot identify that group. Every German in 1939 was not a Nazi, but we describe the actions of that time as being the actions of the Germans. Not every single Palestinian is a terrorist, but that doesn't mean we can't describe Palestinian terrorism. You were trying to nitpick at terminology, you got caught. Quit trying to weasle out of it by changing the context.

[1]Which was wrong, [2]Which was wrong, [3]So the Soviet union was dumb for ever getting in to that race, but all of this is irrelevant, what someone did in the past does not justify what Israel is doing today.

1.not wrong, 2.not wrong, 3.doesn't change the facts

besides which, you took the whole thing out of context, willingfully ignorent I suppose, they wern't ment to be used to justify Israel, but to prove a point about use of terminology about calling Palestinians terrorists (in GENERAL)

And yet again you are labeling all Palestinians as terrorist supporters.

Not all, which I've said repeatedly. You either cannot read or are a jerk.

Having a Korean friend doesn't mean that you aren't a racists and I don't have to meet you to know that you are a racist, the numerous racist comments you have made in this thread are wholly sufficent prove of that.

Seeing how I haven't made a single racist comment that is slander.

But you are using the actions of some members of an ethnic group to justify the oppression of the entire ethnic group.

No I'm not, this is getting tedious, you might want to actually read what I'm saying instead of just making up what you want to believe I've said.

That they do, but the fault lies in those that label all the members of the group as perpetrators of those acts to justify the oppression of that group. What the terrorist and their supporters do does not justify the oppression of all Palestinians, you are now marely side-stepping the point in question.

So because there were some Germans in Nazi Germany who didn't like Hitler or agree with his policies we then therefore shouldn't have bombed that country?

Straw man. My arqument is that you can NOT justify Israels racist apartheid policies and continued oppression of the Palestinians with the fact that some (a minute fraction) Palestinians are terroroists.

A minute fraction couldn't accomplish the death and destruction we see going on in Israel. If the vast numbers of Palestinians didn't agree and suppor them they would be quickly ferreted out and imprisioned.

There are Palestinian terrorists, but most (overwhelmingly vast majority of) Palestinians are NOT terrorists, you are YET again labeling all Palestinians as terrorists based on the actions some Palestinians. That is just as moronic, racists and evil as labeling all African-Americans as criminals because some African-Americans are criminals. And then you camplain when I call you a racist, LOL.
And yet again what someone did 60 odd years ago does not justify what Israel is doing to day.

I'm not calling all Palestinians terrorists, but I am called all (vast majority) terrorists Palestinians (within this regional context of course). You dodged the question, how many terrorists in Israel are not Palestinian?

As to my references, they are parallels not justifications, surely you cannot be so dense...

[Vympel]

Looks like you backpedalled off a cliff Falcon. You merely waved your hand and said "no i'm not, no I'm not" without saying WHAT your position is.

I'm not trying to justify ever action Israel has ever taken, but I also want to make sure that the Palestinians arn't made out to be hapless victims of Evil Tyrannical Oppression(tm)

And where the hell did Mike say that? That is what this thread is about isn't it?

No I'm not, the analogy was this: Just because not every single person in a specific group believed in that group, doesn't mean that we cannot identify that group. Every German in 1939 was not a Nazi, but we describe the actions of that time as being the actions of the Germans. Not every single Palestinian is a terrorist, but that doesn't mean we can't describe Palestinian terrorism. You were trying to nitpick at terminology, you got caught. Quit trying to weasle out of it by changing the context.

What the fuck are you talking about? Are the Palestinians all terrorists, yes or no? Furthermore, are Israel's actions in the OCCUPIED TERRITORIES terrorism?

1.not wrong, 2.not wrong, 3.doesn't change the facts

besides which, you took the whole thing out of context, willingfully ignorent I suppose, they wern't ment to be used to justify Israel, but to prove a point about use of terminology about calling Palestinians terrorists (in GENERAL)

Your morals are obviously fucked up. Even if it HAD to be done (which I certainly will not concede in the case of those firebombed German cities that had no effect on the outcome of the war), that does not make it right.

Not all, which I've said repeatedly. You either cannot read or are a jerk.

Liar. You've made all Palestinians responsible for the actions of a few by saying they all give "aid and comfort" to them. That's what you fucking SAID, don't try and squirm out of it.

Seeing how I haven't made a single racist comment that is slander.

Bullshit, this is what you said:

Those terrorists wouldn't be there if not for the support of the general public, it doesn't matter if each and every one of them picks up a gun, what matters is that the aid and comfort is drawn from the Palestinian people.

You are obviously retarded- did it ever occur to you that the root cause for violence is Israeli OCCUPATION?

So because there were some Germans in Nazi Germany who didn't like Hitler or agree with his policies we then therefore shouldn't have bombed that country?

More fucking ridiculous false analogies. Please demonstrate how the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land is remotely comparable to that of the prime aggressor nation of WW2.

minute fraction couldn't accomplish the death and destruction we see going on in Israel. If the vast numbers of Palestinians didn't agree and suppor them they would be quickly ferreted out and imprisioned.

Unsubstantiated bullshit. Instead of vague hand-waving, why don't you provide some evidence. The Israelis are sure as fuck more culpable than the Palestinains in this Middle Eastern bloodbath- they've been oppressing them for over 50 years, what the fuck did you think was going to happen? The Palestinians are just going to sit there and take it up the ass from an oppressive state that doesn't even grant them equal rights and controls the most basic aspects of their life, down to their movements and fresh water?

As to my references, they are parallels not justifications, surely you cannot be so dense...

And what shitty parallels they are, making out Palestine to be the agressor with your ridiculous Nazi Germany comparison.

[Falcon]

Looks like you backpedalled off a cliff Falcon. You merely waved your hand and said "no i'm not, no I'm not" without saying WHAT your position is.

Your inability to understand what my position is\was doesn't amount to backpeddling on my part.

And where the hell did Mike say that? That is what this thread is about isn't it?

His entire essay, with a brief attack on some minor parts of the arabs, was a trash against Israel, some of it unjustified or at least misleading.

What the fuck are you talking about? Are the Palestinians all terrorists, yes or no? Furthermore, are Israel's actions in the OCCUPIED TERRITORIES terrorism?

The Palestinians are not all terrorists, but the terrorists who are blowing themselves up against Israel are all Palestinians. This isn't a hard concept.

Israel isn't engaging in terrorist activity, it doesn't need to, it has tanks.

Your morals are obviously fucked up. Even if it HAD to be done (which I certainly will not concede in the case of those firebombed German cities that had no effect on the outcome of the war), that does not make it right.

War isn't about what is right, its about your side winning. We like to think that we are right when we go to war, but ultimately it doesn't matter if you were right if you end up dead. Thats why some things that we thought necessary in war then is questioned now. Like the nuclear bombings. I hear a lot of people say they were wrong, but ask the million soldiers who were slated to die in an invasion if it was wrong. Regardless, I was drawing an analogy to show how groups of people are labeled, not to draw parallels between the actions of said groups. You're taking it out of context and since you seem to be either incapable or unwilling to take my analogy for what it was I suggest you simply 'forget it'

Liar. You've made all Palestinians responsible for the actions of a few by saying they all give "aid and comfort" to them. That's what you fucking SAID, don't try and squirm out of it.

Of course I said it, ITS TRUE. That doesn't mean that they ALL are terrorist or terrorist supporters, just that MOST of them HAVE to be or none of this would be happening. See?

Bullshit, this is what you said:

Those terrorists wouldn't be there if not for the support of the general public, it doesn't matter if each and every one of them picks up a gun, what matters is that the aid and comfort is drawn from the Palestinian people.

You are obviously retarded- did it ever occur to you that the root cause for violence is Israeli OCCUPATION?

The occupation was IN RESPONSE to the violence. A TRUE statement is not racist, that is inherently contradictory.

More fucking ridiculous false analogies. Please demonstrate how the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land is remotely comparable to that of the prime aggressor nation of WW2.

I'm saying that the innocent get caught up with the guilty, so saying that we shouldn't go after the guilty because there might be a few innocent is an impracticle way to govern policy.

Unsubstantiated bullshit. Instead of vague hand-waving, why don't you provide some evidence. The Israelis are sure as fuck more culpable than the Palestinains in this Middle Eastern bloodbath- they've been oppressing them for over 50 years, what the fuck did you think was going to happen? The Palestinians are just going to sit there and take it up the ass from an oppressive state that doesn't even grant them equal rights and controls the most basic aspects of their life, down to their movements and fresh water?

Do you think Israel could take the actions it does without the support of its citizens? Why then do you assume that the terrorists take the actions they do without the support of the people they identify with?

Also, I believe the origionator adequately dispelled this whole 'victim Palestine' myth.

And what shitty parallels they are, making out Palestine to be the agressor with your ridiculous Nazi Germany comparison.

No, again, you cannot take my analogy in context so just forget it. It was to show you how we can label a group of people even though there are scattered dissenters within that group.

[Sir Sirius]

Your inability to understand what my position is\was doesn't amount to backpeddling on my part.

What is your position anyway, you've yet to actualy state one and your post are somewhat confusing in this respect.

The Palestinians are not all terrorists, but the terrorists who are blowing themselves up against Israel are all Palestinians. This isn't a hard concept.

A cat is an animal, but not all animals are cat's.
And you still can't justify Israels actions towards the Palestinians by the actions of few terrorists that are Palestinian.

Israel isn't engaging in terrorist activity, it doesn't need to, it has tanks.

Terrorism is terrorism even when conducted with tanks.

Regardless, I was drawing an analogy to show how groups of people are labeled, not to draw parallels between the actions of said groups. You're taking it out of context and since you seem to be either incapable or unwilling to take my analogy for what it was I suggest you simply 'forget it'.

Appeal to Common Practice fallacy, check it out.

Of course I said it, ITS TRUE. That doesn't mean that they ALL are terrorist or terrorist supporters, just that MOST of them HAVE to be or none of this would be happening. See?

Wrong, wrong, wrong. I can't even begin to understand how someone can so stupid and racists to make this ridiculous claim.

I'm saying that the innocent get caught up with the guilty, so saying that we shouldn't go after the guilty because there might be a few innocent is an impracticle way to govern policy.

An impractical way to govern policy? What are you talking about?
And Israel isn't excatly going out of it's way to avoid killing innocent's. Besides Israel isn't driving the Palestinians out of their homes and building colonies in the oocupied territories to combat terrorism.

Do you think Israel could take the actions it does without the support of its citizens? Why then do you assume that the terrorists take the actions they do without the support of the people they identify with?

Israel is a democratic country, but the terrorists hardly hold elections before suicide attacks.

No, again, you cannot take my analogy in context so just forget it. It was to show you how we can label a group of people even though there are scattered dissenters within that group.

Appeal to Common Practice fallacy, check it out. The fact that it is commonly done doesn't mean that it is right, in fact I belief that it is never right.

[C.S.Strowbridge]

You know it is possible to be factually correct and present those facts in a misleading way.

Which is precisely what CNN does every day. Silly me, trying to oppose that unstoppable tide of propaganda by pointing out the things that CNN would rather not mention.

Just a side note, CNN is nominally run by Ted Turner, who is an anti-semite. And I don't mean he supports the Palestinians, so he must hate Jews. He believes that whole, 'Jews control the world' bullshit.

[Darth Wong]

Just a side note, CNN is nominally run by Ted Turner, who is an anti-semite. And I don't mean he supports the Palestinians, so he must hate Jews. He believes that whole, 'Jews control the world' bullshit.

America is full of Americans who don't like Jews, but ironically enough, like Israel because:

A) Israel is necessary for the Christian prophecies of the Second Coming.
B) Israel is a place to put all the Jews, so they won't be living down the street.

[Darth Wong]

Falcon, your "logic" rests on the premise that if some Palestinians do bad things, it's OK to brutalize all of them. Shoot their kids for throwing rocks, treat them like animals, humiliate them daily at checkpoints, bulldoze their homes with no compensation, even limit the amount of fresh water they get to drink.

Does it occur to you that this premise could be just as easily applied to the opposite parties? A Palestinian could just as easily say that because some Israelis shoot unarmed kids in the street, destroy peoples' homes, shoot people at checkpoints and generally terrorize them by shoving guns in their faces with little or no provocation, and deny them the necessities of life such as an adequate fresh water supply, it's OK to brutalize all of them.

So where does this end? The fact is that while I'm willing to say that Palestinian terrorism is an immoral response to a grievance, you refuse to admit that Israeli state terrorism is also an immoral response to a grievance. You claim that I am being one-sided by not agreeing with you, but you obviously fail to recognize the grossly one-sided nature of your own position.

[Moff Jerjerrod]

BWAAHAHAAHA

The guy that started this, his name is... (holding in laughter) NIXON! Bwaahahaha

And he even has a little picture of Nixon after his name! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA


"I am not a crook"


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Thanks for not contributing, "Superman" BWAAHAHAHAHAHA.

Aside from the fact that Nixon opened up relations with China, one of the pivotal moments of the Cold War, and is one of our most underrated presidents, he was also mentioned in Star Trek VI. Perhaps you were looking for the "I'm a dork" thread..

[C.S.Strowbridge]

Just a side note, CNN is nominally run by Ted Turner, who is an anti-semite. And I don't mean he supports the Palestinians, so he must hate Jews. He believes that whole, 'Jews control the world' bullshit.

America is full of Americans who don't like Jews, but ironically enough, like Israel because:

A) Israel is necessary for the Christian prophecies of the Second Coming.
B) Israel is a place to put all the Jews, so they won't be living down the street.

I know, but I don't think CNN could be called a Jewish Propaganda Machine.

[tharkûn]

A couple of quick points:
1. Israeli Arabs CAN serve in the IDF, they just are not required to do so. Everyone else (barring some religious scholars because you have to cut deals to run the Knesset) faces conscription.
2. On checkpoints, WTF? Did ANYBODY complain about Americans being humiliated at checkpoints when they were going after the DC snipers? The fact of the matter is checkpoints are needed because Israel faces numerous killers like the DC sniper every bloody week. The goal of the checkpoints is to find and prevent MASS MURDERERS. If your dignity needs to be sacrificied to find the asshole with a bomb ... I don't frikking care. Lives are worth more than dignity.
3. There is a categoric difference between intentionally killing civillians and killing them collaterally, through negligence, and outright mistakes. This is recognized by every legal system in the world, circumstances of the killing do matter. A terrorist bomb in a pizzeria is categorically different than rocket used to take out a military target which has civillians in the vicinity. Even a soldier who breaks discipline and shoots into a riot with live bullets is not equivalent to a premeditated bombing of a completely civillian target.