babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Israeli troops devastate West Bank village market

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Israeli troops devastate West Bank village market
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 22 January 2003 02:28 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Israeli troops devastate West Bank village market

quote:
Israeli soldiers demolished 62 shops at a market yesterday, destroying the livelihood of hundreds of Palestinians. In the early morning, about 300 troops streamed into the market, just outside the village of Nazlat Issa. They brought seven bulldozers.

From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 22 January 2003 03:01 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Betcha one of the shopkeepers just had to be a terrorist, right?

Nothing like swatting a fly with a Buick for a little overkill.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 22 January 2003 03:26 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You would think that Israeli planners would be flexible enough to move the fence, rather than the people.
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 22 January 2003 07:32 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
All part of the Likud re-election campaign.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 22 January 2003 11:04 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
But WHY? It is such a STUPID thing to do, as well as inhumane. Who anywhere else in the world is not going to be disgusted by this action?
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 22 January 2003 11:25 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I hope that Hamas does not play into Likud's hands and retaliate for this aggression. It's all senseless. Send in the UN. Now.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 11:28 AM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Something like this is wrong. I just wish you'd people would show the same disgust when there is another suicide bombing.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 22 January 2003 11:34 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You are an honest to God asshole, aren't you? Just wrong? That is all it is? Where is your disgust in this terrible example of ethnic cleansing?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 22 January 2003 12:10 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
WingNut he just SAID it was wrong. He was drawing a comparison between sympathy for Palestinian victims and Israeli victims. No need to call him an asshole over it.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 12:21 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
WingNut fuck you. What do you want me to say ? Incredibly wrong ? Sorry if I use stronger words for a suicide bombing. Stuff like that tends to bother me more.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 22 January 2003 12:32 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Okay, now you're even. The "fuck you" cancels out the "asshole". Let it end now.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 12:39 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
ok
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 22 January 2003 12:45 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Michelle, I was calling him an asshole over this:
quote:
I just wish you'd people would show the same disgust when there is another suicide bombing.

I think, I and many others, do demonstrate the same disgust over abuses committed agaisnt either side and I resent someone who is obvioulsy incapable of showing the "same disgust" telling me the level of disgust I ought to exhibit. Beyond that, point taken.

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mimichekele2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3232

posted 22 January 2003 12:46 PM      Profile for Mimichekele2        Edit/Delete Post
Is this where we get to call Michelle, cracker jack and wingnut Nazis or other nasty words?

Michelle closed the Spot the Nazi thread so I just had to get it in somewhere.

oops, hey, wait a minute, put down those rocks, I said put'em down. Ouch, that hurts, don't throw stuff at me. Jeeeesus. Ouch!!! [mutters to himself as he slinks back to the stacks]


From: More lawyers, fewer bricks! | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 12:51 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
WingNut, maybe in your own little fantasy world you show disgust over suicide bombings. Not when you're posting tough.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jimmy Brogan
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3290

posted 22 January 2003 12:52 PM      Profile for Jimmy Brogan   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
All part of the Likud re-election campaign.

The first thing I thought of when I read this - 'Likud's poll numbers must be down again.'


From: The right choice - Iggy Thumbscrews for Liberal leader | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 12:52 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
WingNut, maybe in your own little fantasy world you show disgust over suicide bombings. Not when you're posting though.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 22 January 2003 01:03 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What's your point CJ?
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 01:09 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
it's obvious what my point is.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 22 January 2003 01:23 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, destroying people's businesses and livelihoods is about the best way of ensuring a future supply of suicide bombers. Those hard-working small business people will be reduced to dependence on handouts - and often Islamist extremist groups are a handy supply of funds, along with indoctrination and a religious version of the roots of the conflict that can never admit a practical solution... like the nutty Jewish fundamentalists in the settlements.

I doubt there is anyone on babble who doesn't find suicide bombings horrific. However some of us would like to eliminate the causes thereof, be they social (lack of a future for Palestinians, especially young people) or ideological (the growth of a religious fundamentalist outlook among both peoples, viewing this conflict as a holy war).


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 01:26 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
ok, here's my question. If Israel withdraws all it's troops from the disputed territories and dismantles the settlements, do we believe that there will be no more suicide bombings ? Or any other type of attacks on Israel ?
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 22 January 2003 01:27 PM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There's a reason why Israeli Arabs (ie Palestinians living within Israel's 1967 borders) almost never engage in terrorism while it's far more common among Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza - Israeli Arabs are much more economically secure (though still subordinate to the Jewish population). If there were jobs and a future for Palestinians, particularly the youth, you'd see incidents of terrorism drop like a stone. But by its destruction of the economic infrastructure of the West Bank and Gaza and its restrictions on what goods Palestinians can produce in order to eliminate competition with Israeli industry, Israel is only sewing more seeds that will result in violence and terrorism.
From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Maggot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3585

posted 22 January 2003 02:27 PM      Profile for Maggot   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Hi Cracker Jack,

Of course it won't. There are groups dedicated to the destruction of Israel that will not be a signatory to any land for peace deal.

That said, these groups will become (even more) marginlized over time -- just like when, in the salad days of Oslo, the PLO was r9ounding up Islamic Jihad and Hamas members on a regular basis (and in the process, earning condemnations from Amnesty Int'l, etc.). But the point is this: when the Palestinian people had hope, attacks on Israellis were not supported, and also rare.


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 22 January 2003 02:43 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
ok, here's my question. If Israel withdraws all it's troops from the disputed territories and dismantles the settlements, do we believe that there will be no more suicide bombings ? Or any other type of attacks on Israel ?

Yes.

quote:
it's obvious what my point is.

It is not clear at all, are you sugesting that Wingnut supports Hamas, or what?

[ 22 January 2003: Message edited by: Moredreads ]


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 22 January 2003 02:46 PM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Me too. Though it's also necessary for a new Palestinian state to be economically vaible. I believe that the whole region has to be reorganised on a socialist basis but at the very least you need economic cooperation at least between Israel, Palestine and Jordan.
From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 22 January 2003 02:49 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Excelent. I would like to see a case made for the opposite. In other words, that if the Palestinians stopped sucide attacks, would Israel withdraw from the WB?
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 02:54 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I believe that Israel would withdraw from the west bank and gaza. But I don't believe it would happen right away. Also, didn't Israel occupy and build settlements on land seized from egypt and withdraw it's troops and tore down the settlements after a peace deal was reached with egypt ?
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 22 January 2003 03:37 PM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If Israel withdraws all it's troops from the disputed territories and dismantles the settlements, do we believe that there will be no more suicide bombings ? Or any other type of attacks on Israel ?
The victims of Israel ethnic cleansing since 1948 and their progeny still have a grudge against Israel. Until their loss is recognized and redressed Israel can never have peace. And that is as it should be. No country has a right to get away with crimes against humanity for any reason.

[ 22 January 2003: Message edited by: satana ]


From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Maggot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3585

posted 22 January 2003 03:53 PM      Profile for Maggot   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
I think it's a dangerous assumption to believe that all suicide attacks will automatically stop upon Israeli withdrawl, precisely because it plays into Israeli hands. Because when (not if) a post-withdrawl bombing occurs, the Israeli government can say, "Look, we tried, but these Palestinians can't control their own kind"...and use it as a pretext to re-occupy the territories. In other words, it's a wild card.

There are groups out there who will not stop immediately. To believe otherwise is simply naive. To tie a peace deal to the cessation fo the bombings is (a) impossible, since none (except perhaps for the Al-Asqa bunch) will be a signatory to the agreement, and (b) stupid, since it gives the suicide bombers the power to scuttle peace deals, which is exactly what they desire.


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 05:06 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So what you're saying is the PLO cannot stop suicide bombings ? Doesn't that make the PLO irrelevant then ?
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 05:08 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Santana, explain to me what you think should happen then ? Also, I've heard the suicide bombings will stop when the occupation ends. So is that a lie ?
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 22 January 2003 05:09 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
WingNut, maybe in your own little fantasy world you show disgust over suicide bombings. Not when you're posting though.

I have expressed disgust at suicide bombings and missile strikes. What you are incapbale of understanding through your shroud of hate is that I have a respect for human life and dignity. Dignity? Look it up. No one will expect you to understand anytime soon.

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 22 January 2003 05:11 PM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Until their loss is recognized and redressed Israel can never have peace. And that is as it should be. No country has a right to get away with crimes against humanity for any reason.

Sounds like an awesome recipe for perpetual war. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to hurl rocks at British people. Damned Limey's! I never got my cheque for the potato famine!!!


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 22 January 2003 05:18 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I believe that Israel would withdraw from the west bank and gaza. But I don't believe it would happen right away. Also, didn't Israel occupy and build settlements on land seized from egypt and withdraw it's troops and tore down the settlements after a peace deal was reached with egypt ?

The Sinai is a worthless desert for the most part, giving it up to make peace with Israel's largest Arab neighbour is simply realistic. On the other hand, the relatively powerless Palestinians are sitting on property of value.

Question: Has Israel, as a sign of good faith, ever imposed a moratorium on settlement building?

[ 22 January 2003: Message edited by: Moredreads ]


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 22 January 2003 05:20 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"Until their loss is recognized and redressed
Israel can never have peace. And that is as it should be. No country has a right to get away with crimes against humanity for any reason."

Aren't you saying, in effect, that until Israel atones for its crimes against humanity, it will continue to be a victim of (other) crimes against humanity, "and that is as it should be"?


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 22 January 2003 05:22 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Both sides need to atone. But that can come after peace.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 22 January 2003 05:36 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
WingNut, your responses are pathetic. Your insults are pathetic too. You're so moral. Is there anyone as moral as you ?
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 22 January 2003 05:39 PM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
That's waaaaaay uncalled for crackerjack.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 22 January 2003 05:41 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
CJ, if you find Wingnuts response to pious, try responding to my post...

Question: Has Israel, as a gesture of good faith, ever put a moratorium on settlment building?


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Maggot
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3585

posted 22 January 2003 06:12 PM      Profile for Maggot   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So what you're saying is the PLO cannot stop suicide bombings ? Doesn't that make the PLO irrelevant then ?

(Sorry I couldn't respond until now, had to step out...)

Hi CJ,

It's obviously true that since Arafat, et al, are currently confined to the bunker in Ramallah, that the PA's ability to stop suicide bombings is greatly curtailed. But when Oslo showed promise -- before Netanyahu and Barak upped the settler population from 100,00 to 200,000 in the span of about seven years, changing the facts on the ground while ostensibly negotiating "peace" -- the PA was rounding up Hamas and Islamic Jihad members with great regularity (and incurring the ire of human rights groups in the process). During this period, when support for the PA was high and the prospects for a negotiated solution seemed good, there were very few attacks against Israelis -- in the political climate of the day, they weren't supported.

That's because the Palestinians had hope, and that's what's missing from the equation today.

So, my answer is still: No. The attacks wouldn't stop immediately, because Hamas and Islamic Jihad are not under PA control. But as conditions improved for the Palestinians, support for attacks would dry up.


2. "Doesn't this make the PA irrelevant?" No. A negotiated peace wth a strong and strongly supported PA, endorsed by the vast majority of Palestinians, would be the beginning of the end of the more radical groups, who would find it increasingly difficult to find like-minded nut cases to blow themselves up.

So the bombings wouldn't stop all at once. But they would drastically reduce down to a trickle, and be roundly condemned as criminal acts by all.


From: BC | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 22 January 2003 06:25 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
All good points to be sure. I am still interested in finding out if CJ has evidence, to suggest that there is political will in Israel, even to meet the minimum Palestinian demands. One can imagine that to Palestinians, the drastic increase in settlment building during the period of Oslo detente, must have looked very much like a last ditch land grab by an Israel committed to an internationally recognized peace process.

One which Sharon annouced, even before the ink was dry on the draft he had never set eyes on, that he would reject, if elected.

[ 22 January 2003: Message edited by: Moredreads ]


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 22 January 2003 07:52 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Is there anyone as moral as you ?

Absolutely! Many. Many here on both sides of the question. Many who disagree vemhemently on the question and the answers but who can still empathise with all of the victims. Maybe one day you will join us.

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 22 January 2003 10:22 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have seen WingNut express sorrow and disgust over suicide bombings. Maybe I just have a longer memory than you, CJ.

On the other hand, I do find these activities more outrageous when carried out openly (and supposedly legally) by a legitimately elected government than when a terrorist group commits them. Criminal organisations commit crimes. That is what they do. Elected governments are the official representatives of the people - all the people, not just the fanatics and criminals - and should be above this sort of viciousness.

Obviously, this doesn't matter a damn to the people whose lives and property have been destroyed on each side. But.

As for withdrawing from the territories, no, it wouldn't stop the suicide bombings right away. It would, however, decrease their number. Popular support for them would wane. They would slow, and yes, I do think they would eventually stop.

The alternative is to leave the settlements or even add some new ones, which guarantees that the suicide bombings will continue at their present rate - or get worse.


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 23 January 2003 12:26 AM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
So what you're saying is the PLO cannot stop suicide bombings ? Doesn't that make the PLO irrelevant then ? CJ

Doesn't that make Sharon, the Likud government and the IDF irrelevant? Their policies haven't stopped suicide-bombings.

In another post, CJ you asked:

quote:
How come there were no suicide bombers when Egypt and Jordan controlled the west bank and the gaza strip ?
Well, just what are you implying? That Palestinians have always been suicide-bombers, that it is somehow ingrained in their culture, and that to be more fair-minded they should have blown themselves up during Egyptian and Jordanian occupation as well?

In the first place, suicide-bombing is not a facet of Palestinian culture, its a recent phenomenon starting in the early-nineties as a desperate reaction to massacres and assasinations perpetrated by Israeli forces.

If you want to stop it, ask what started it. Look at the conditions that create the suicide-bomber. Humiliate a people long enough and someone's going to run amok.


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 23 January 2003 01:02 AM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You ain't seen nothin' yet. Just wait till Bush starts his war, then we'll see (or not, given the controls on the media) of what Sharon is capable.

How can anyone justify this? For all those for whom Israel is always right, tell me: Can a government which engages in clearly criminal activities, which bear a frightening resemblance to what European Jews themselves were forced to endure, be called democratic and just?

If, after Jenin, and Nablus, and all the assassinations, forced transfer, demolishions, and the presence of thousands of troops, hundreds of tanks, and complete air superiority, suicide bombers still manage to get through, and militants still manage to get weapons and explosives, how can you still say that the occupation is making Israel safe? Its obviously a complete failure (except for the political fortunes of Likud, and the welfare fortunes of American weapons manufacturers). Doesn't this tell you that is has nothing to do with security and everything to do with the usual Imperial, corporate, and criminal considerations? In other words, it's a profitable enterprise for those in power, in whose interest it is to prolong and escalate the conflict.


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 23 January 2003 01:11 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There is a lot of emphasis on the bombers, yet none of our fearless Israel boosters can come up with even one piece of evidence that concretely shows that Israel's good intentions. What has Israel done to show Palestinians that there is political will within Israel to meet any, if not all of Palestinian demands? I have asked the simple question, has Israel, as a sign of good faith, ever imposed a moratorium on settlement building?

No answer so far! Why? Because it never has. How can one reasonably expect that Israel intends to quit the WB, when they have never even halted building settlments even for a second, even during Oslo.

[ 23 January 2003: Message edited by: Moredreads ]


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Beechtree
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3511

posted 23 January 2003 02:09 AM      Profile for Beechtree        Edit/Delete Post
Settlements are a logistical necessity. They impose order, they clean up the shanty breeding grounds of tomorrows terrorists. They act as a buffer zone, and we must show our solidarity to the brave cililians who live there under constant threat.
From: Hog Town | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 23 January 2003 02:28 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well there we go, an honest answer, and one that is so blatantly racist that it brings into question every moral code that Israel is supposed to stand for. It is Himmleresque in its distain. It was so gross I thought it had to be sarcastic, at first.

With cheerleaders like this CJ, do you still honestly believe that Israel is ever going to abide by 242, in any measure. The above is nothing more than a atavistic call to the white mans burden, ignoring thousands of years of Arab culture in one swoop of a vain and ignorant mind.

Would you rather keep company of those who espouse ideals like Wingnut, or those given above?

[ 23 January 2003: Message edited by: Moredreads ]


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Beechtree
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3511

posted 23 January 2003 02:46 AM      Profile for Beechtree        Edit/Delete Post
Is your rudeness directed at me? What is so 'blatantly racist' about pointing out the obvious?
The settlements have absorbed the violence that would otherwise penetrate the core of Israeli society. That is one purpose of settling: to push back the violence, make it more and more peripheral. Israel has taken squalor and disorder and shaped it into functioning communities. That is what I call a viable vision.

From: Hog Town | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 23 January 2003 02:49 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

A viable community?

From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 23 January 2003 02:56 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Is your rudeness directed at me? What is so 'blatantly racist' about pointing out the obvious?
The settlements have absorbed the violence that would otherwise penetrate the core of Israeli society. That is one purpose of settling: to push back the violence, make it more and more peripheral. Israel has taken squalor and disorder and shaped it into functioning communities. That is what I call a viable vision.

I would hardly call it rude, I would call it kind.

And with each new expansion, there must be larger security zone, and within that security zone comes a new settlement, and then a larger security zone for that. And where does it end?

Your entire mental construct is so similar to Himmler's I suggest you seek psychiatric help. All they really intended to do after all was push back unclean and unworthy Jews that had 'penetrated the core' of German society. 'They took squalor and disorder and shaped it into functioning communities.'

You are creepy and disgusting, I will respond no more to this. You sicken me, and most of the rest of the world.


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 23 January 2003 04:47 AM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Cracker Jack: explain to me what you think should happen then ? Also, I've heard the suicide bombings will stop when the occupation ends. So is that a lie ?
The root of the conflict is not "the occupation", but Israel's refusal to recognise Palestinian rights to their land when Israel was created. To end the conflict Israel needs to officially acknowledge its crimes and make serious effort towards restitution of Palestinians.

As for the suicide bombing. the whole thing makes me sick. Who is supplying these people? Who is really in control? People are providing Palestinians with their weapons, using the conflict to further their own interests. I also hope the suicide bombing stop, but who is making the promises? I suspect Palestinian groups are not the only people involved.

I agree with Maggots last post concerning suicide bombings.

quote:
sheep: Sounds like an awesome recipe for perpetual war. Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm off to hurl rocks at British people.
The Irish people deserve official recognition and compensation for the Irish famine. But thats no excuse to hurl rocks at tourists.

quote:
Mr. Magoo: Aren't you saying, in effect, that until Israel atones for its crimes against humanity, it will continue to be a victim of (other) crimes against humanity, "and that is as it should be"?
No. No one should ever be a victim of crimes against humanity. By "no Peace", I mean no normalization of ties with the Israeli state, which in effect means approval or at least indifference to its actions. A better alternative to violence would be an international political, economic and cultural boycott.

From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 23 January 2003 07:29 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Settlements are a logistical necessity. They impose order, they clean up the shanty breeding grounds of tomorrows terrorists.

What the hell? They "clean up" the "shanty" districts? Oh, you mean by forcing the shanty-dwellers on to smaller and smaller pieces of land? By destroying their livelihoods?

If they wanted to "clean up" the Palestinian districts, they should have allowed the Palestinians to stay there. By your logic, if I demolish a black slum community and put up a whites-only country club in its place, I'm doing the slum-dwellers a favour.

As for the settlers, I feel no solidarity with people who would endanger their own lives and those of their children by choosing to live on blatantly stolen land, at massive expense to their own government and terrible cost to the people they have displaced. They are foolish at best, racist religious fanatics at worst. I sympathize with their losses, when those occur, but I feel no need to support them in their folly.

quote:

The settlements have absorbed the violence that would otherwise penetrate the core of Israeli society.

Yeah, it's really worked out well so far, hasn't it? How long has it been since that bus station bombing in Tel Aviv? What about Jerusalem - is it safe there?

They're antagonizing an already angry and miserable people. I don't think they're "absorbing" much.

quote:

That is one purpose of settling: to push back the violence, make it more and more peripheral.

Tel Aviv and Jerusalem are "peripheral"?

quote:

Israel has taken squalor and disorder and shaped it into functioning communities.

Holy shit, that is racist. "Squalor and disorder"? You mean Arab towns? Arab farms? I suppose it wasn't possible to do anything about this "squalor and disorder" without evicting the squalid and disorderly inhabitants and installing nice white New Yorkers in their place?

Anyway, the squalor (or "squalor") persists in between those "functioning communities." And it's probably much worse for their presence. Congratulations, settlers.

[ 23 January 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 23 January 2003 10:47 AM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The Israelis have never put a stop to settlement building. But like I said, they tore down the settlements in Egypt when they reached a peace deal. You can't dismiss that by saying the land is only desert and useless. What makes the Palestinian land so much more valuable ? Also, the land where Israel is now was also a wasteland wasn't it ? Didn't Israelis drain out swamps and such and make the land liveable ? All I'm saying is that, reading stuff like that makes me believe that Israel would tear down the settlements if there really was a peace deal reached between the two.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 23 January 2003 02:40 PM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
the land where Israel is now was also a wasteland wasn't it

That sound like good old N. American Manifest Destiny and Monroe Doctrine thinking from the 1800's. All that "wasteland" to the west, inhabited by primitive savages and Mexicans. Why, we'd be doing them a favour by taking it, killing them, and harvesting the resources!

The Fertile Cresent wasn't called that for nothing. It has been inhabited since Humans first left Africa. The "wasteland" is just the opposite, which is why it is being taken and ethnically cleansed in the first place.

The "we have taken the desert and made it bloom" crap is old-hat justification for theft and displacement, almost verbatim from the old west where the water resources were diverted and stolen for settlers to irrigate land taken from Native populations who had managed to live there since the retreat of the glaciers (and maybe before).

But since they were just violent pagan savages, it was o.k.

Oh yeah, and Beechtree: Fuck off. The last thing anyone needs is to hear Klanspeak from some racist asshole.
*plonk*


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 23 January 2003 03:00 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"No. No one should ever be a victim of crimes against humanity. By "no Peace", I mean no normalization of ties with the Israeli state, which in effect means approval or at least indifference to its actions. A better alternative to violence would be an international political, economic and cultural boycott."

Understood now. As for boycotts, I'd suggest beginning with the first two. A cultural boycott would probably involve having to untie the Gordian knot of Zionism vs. Jewish and State vs. Culture


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Beechtree
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3511

posted 23 January 2003 03:15 PM      Profile for Beechtree        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Oh yeah, and Beechtree: Fuck off. The last thing anyone needs is to hear Klanspeak from some racist asshole.
Look here, Jingler, this is a forum for discussion not insults and expletives.

I put forward a rational position and I don't see where or how it justifies the label 'racism'.

Settlements are part of the dynamic process of expanding and improving the state. Take the American declaration of Independence. It contains no mention of territorial limits.
Without the settlements the IDF would be ruling a foreign population. We are talking about a territory over which there are competing claims. Israel has an equal, if not an urgent right to them. And as I mentioned before, settlements are key to security in the region. Only terrorists use the issue as an excuse for more violence.


From: Hog Town | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 23 January 2003 03:19 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Beechtree your position is as equally valid and moderate as anything put forward by Hamas.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 23 January 2003 03:27 PM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
No. No one should ever be a victim of crimes against humanity. By "no Peace", I mean no normalization of ties with the Israeli state, which in effect means approval or at least indifference to its actions. A better alternative to violence would be an international political, economic and cultural boycott.

That tactic sure worked well in Afghanistan. No international recognition of the Taliban regime except from Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, and an international political, economic and cultural boycott from the rest of the world.

International recognition and normalization of relations are fundamental steps towards negotiation and peaceful resolution of issues, not the prize at the end of the rainbow. Your boycott idea could have disasterous consequences to the Palestinian people. If Israel is shunned and basically ignored by the rest of the world, the only result I see is coming out of it is a blank cheque to go ahead and do whatever they want.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 23 January 2003 03:32 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
disasterous consequences to the Palestinian people

More disastrous?

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 23 January 2003 03:42 PM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Don't believe that it couldn't get even worse Wingnut. For both sides.

edited to add...

whoops...should have read my post more carefully. Sorry. Yes, I meant more disasterous. They're pretty disasterous now, but they have the potential to get worse.

[ 23 January 2003: Message edited by: sheep ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 23 January 2003 04:06 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The Israelis have never put a stop to settlement building. But like I said, they tore down the settlements in Egypt when they reached a peace deal.

I am not dismissing Israeli ability to fomulate smart policy. Appeasing Egypt was smart. Egypt is really the only powerful Arab neighbour to Israel. This is a cogent and reasonable understanding of those issues, you may disagree, but you have to agree that it bares a certain logic. I think that a large amount of Israeli scholarship agrees with my reading, as well -- even in the IDF.

Egypt does not represent the Palestinians. So, in regards to the West Bank and Gaza, where is your evidence that Israel is serious about complying with any measure of 242?

quote:
put forward a rational position and I don't see where or how it justifies the label 'racism'.

The engine of the Holocaust was rationality. A series of rational decisions based on a insidious concept, that of eugenics, of natural societal and racial superiority.


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 23 January 2003 04:43 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Jingles, you are missing the point. Moredreads said that Israel left the Suez because it is desert and useless. I'm asking wasn't the land where Israel is now much the same ?
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Beechtree
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3511

posted 23 January 2003 05:07 PM      Profile for Beechtree        Edit/Delete Post
My people, drop your hostility and put aside your unjust rebukes for a moment. Listen to history, see how all peoples and civilizations have sought expansion, for boundaries are made by the mind, and it is a sign of health and vitality to over-reach them. Come, my people, listen to the voice of history, the great crescendo is near, for Israel too shall be a deciding power in the world, and the end shall justify the means, for the weak contend with each other and cause endless strife, but the powerful determine the future and are the guardians of its greatest hope.
My people, it is just when things seem their worst, that we are nearing the goal.

From: Hog Town | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 23 January 2003 05:18 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well that takes the cake. That is just beyond comprehension.
From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 23 January 2003 05:46 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Jingles, you are missing the point. Moredreads said that Israel left the Suez because it is desert and useless. I'm asking wasn't the land where Israel is now much the same ?

Not at all. It has a completley different, go there and you will see. Among other things the area of the WB, holds a a different emotional context in the Israeli mythology. It is part of the promissed land, whereas the Sinai, is not and never has been part of that mythology.

Note also, that Israel signed the peace accord after a strong show of force by the Arab nations in the 73 war, wherein Israel lost territory to Egypt.

The Alon plan for settlement and annexation of the WB, was drawn up after the '67 war. To this date Israel has not significantly diverted itself from the practical measures proposed therein.

Now, where does the ongoing settlement of these lands fit into the 'peace process?' What actions has Israel taken to reassure Palestinians, that it will comply with 242, without the preassure of violence?


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 23 January 2003 05:56 PM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
sheep: Your boycott idea could have disasterous consequences to the Palestinian people.
UN troops should be sent to protect Palestinians if there is a danger to their lives and property.

Do you really think Israel would act aggressively without protection from a major outside power? That would have disasterous consequences for the Israeli people.


From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 23 January 2003 06:01 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
My people, drop your hostility and put aside your unjust rebukes for a moment. Listen to history, see how all peoples and civilizations have sought expansion, for boundaries are made by the mind, and it is a sign of health and vitality to over-reach them.

Would you agree then that:

"...this economic supremacy, of the the west over the rest of the world if I do not bring it into close connection with a political conception of supremacy which has been peculiar to the west for many centuries and has been regarded as in the nature of things: this conception it has maintained in its dealings with other peoples. Take any single area you like, take for example India. England did not conquer India by the way of justice and of law: she conquered India without regard to the wishes, to the views of the natives, or to their formulations of justice, and, when necessary, she has upheld this supremacy with the most brutal ruthlessness. Just in the same way Cortez or Pizarro annexed Central America and the northern states of South America, not on the basis of any claim of right, but from the absolute inborn feeling of the superiority of the west. The settlement of the North American continent is just as little the consequence of any claim of superior right in any democratic or international sense; it was the consequence of a consciousness of right which was rooted solely in the conviction of the superiority and therefore of the right of the west. If I think away this attitude of mind which in the course of the last three or four centuries has won the world for the west, then the destiny of this race would in fact have been no different from that, say, of the Chinese: an immensely congested mass of human beings crowded upon an extraordinarily narrow territory, an over-population with all its unavoidable consequences. If Fate allowed the west to take a different path, that is only because this west was convinced that it had the right to organize the rest of the world."

ala Kitchener


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 23 January 2003 07:07 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Come, my people, listen to the voice of history, the great crescendo is near, for Israel too shall be a deciding power in the world, and the end shall justify the means

This has got to be a joke. Got to be.


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 23 January 2003 07:31 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I fear it is not.
I think we have a true suprmacist among us.
All empires must fall. The weak often become the strong.
Where are the Romans today? The Romans who ruled Judea with an iron fist and for whom the ends justified the means? The Nazis were once strong. The ends justified the means for them, too. Beechtree proudly stands in the company of infamy. I wonder if he/she believes in karma.

[ 23 January 2003: Message edited by: WingNut ]


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
flotsom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2832

posted 23 January 2003 07:49 PM      Profile for flotsom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
My people, drop your hostility and put aside your unjust rebukes for a moment. Listen to history, see how all peoples and civilizations have sought expansion, for boundaries are made by the mind, and it is a sign of health and vitality to over-reach them. Come, my people, listen to the voice of history, the great crescendo is near, for Israel too shall be a deciding power in the world, and the end shall justify the means, for the weak contend with each other and cause endless strife, but the powerful determine the future and are the guardians of its greatest hope.
My people, it is just when things seem their worst, that we are nearing the goal.

...And He spoke unto His clamouring hoards and these hoards knew not from whence He came, but He smote them a mighty smote, so that none too soon would forget His name and His name was Beechtree


From: the flop | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Beechtree
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3511

posted 23 January 2003 08:08 PM      Profile for Beechtree        Edit/Delete Post
You rail and you mock, but self-loathing motivates your speech. You are a near-sighted people. I offer you a vision, a way of comprehending the settlements, putting them into context of a grand ideal. Yes there will be violence, dispossesion, exclusion. Life is not a bunch of flowers. Reach into the well of history and you will find the key to the future.
Why call me a Supremist? For what? Seeing clearly? A policy of aggrandizement is the only sane policy.

From: Hog Town | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 23 January 2003 08:11 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, thanks for that, Beechtree. And now back to our regularly scheduled topic.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 23 January 2003 08:14 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
but self-loathing motivates your speech. You are a near-sighted people. I offer you a vision, a way of comprehending the settlements, putting them into context of a grand ideal. Yes there will be violence, dispossesion, exclusion. Life is not a bunch of flowers.

He is either jesting or else he is a complete lunatic.

From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 23 January 2003 08:19 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Must be Sophie Treadwell's twin. Guess it is the cold that is bringing out all the trolls.
From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
flotsom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2832

posted 23 January 2003 08:20 PM      Profile for flotsom   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You are a near-sighted people

quote:
Life is not a bunch of flowers.

Yes. We are a nearsighted people from a far-off land. For ages beyond memory we have been scrabbing and crawling like scorpions over these sharp stones of our bitter fate.

Truly He is wise. This life is not a bunch of flowers.

Everyone:

THIS LIFE IS NOT A BUNCH OF FLOWERS

and again

THIS LIFE IS NOT A BUNCH OF FLOWERS

OoooDeeeOh OoooooH Oh OoooDeeeOh OoooooH Oh

[ 24 January 2003: Message edited by: flotsom ]


From: the flop | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 23 January 2003 09:10 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hee!

quote:
You are a near-sighted people. I offer you a vision, a way of comprehending the settlements, putting them into context of a grand ideal.

I don't share that ideal. My grand ideal for the Fertile Crescent is a multifaith, multicultural ideal. I do not care for colonialism.

quote:

Yes there will be violence, dispossesion, exclusion. Life is not a bunch of flowers. Reach into the well of history and you will find the key to the future.

"Who today remembers the Armenians?"

The well of history contains a lot of poison and blood. Aggrandizement? Lebensraum, eh? Have you learned nothing from the twentieth century?

I'm the descendant of colonizers myself, and there isn't much I can do to make up for the evil things that happened to bring my family here; not the injustices that encouraged them to leave the British Isles, and not the injustices that made room for them in Canada. But when things like that happen in the world today, I can damn well oppose them. I don't burn people at the stake or treat my illnesses with leeches or throw buckets of shit in the street, either. Maybe you think that's self-loathing. I call it progress.


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Beechtree
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3511

posted 23 January 2003 09:54 PM      Profile for Beechtree        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
. But when things like that happen in the world today, I can damn well oppose them. I don't burn people at the stake or treat my illnesses with leeches or throw buckets of shit in the street, either. Maybe you think that's self-loathing. I call it progress.
Speaking of buckets of shit...
Have you or anyone here, any concern for Israel, the ideal of Israel? Surrounded by a mono-culture of Islam, why must the fledgling nation of Israel be multi-faith, ambitionless and cowering? Do you fight for the return of land to Native Americans? Of course not. Because you recognize deep down that destiny and power are forever intertwined. You call it colonialism. Seen clearly, it is the formative principle of history.

From: Hog Town | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 23 January 2003 10:41 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, BT life is not a bowl of flowers, but what did you think of he quote I provided. What are the merits, or lack of merits, of that?
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 23 January 2003 11:22 PM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Or the beating of the drums of war. It would be funny if it wasn't it true. But it is. That's how the world has always worked.

If it didn't work that way, than what exactly are we trying to change then?


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 23 January 2003 11:22 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I just think that Israel reacts the way they do because after witnessing 6 million of their people get slaughtered, they feel they don't want to ever see something like that happen again.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 23 January 2003 11:23 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Have you or anyone here, any concern for Israel, the ideal of Israel?

Yeah, I do. Which is why I am deeply angered at those who have made it the agent of such brutality and injustice. It was supposed to be a light unto nations. It has allowed itself to be led astray.

quote:

Surrounded by a mono-culture of Islam, why must the fledgling nation of Israel be multi-faith, ambitionless and cowering?

"Ambitionless and cowering"? Uh, what kind of ambition do you mean? I think a nation's ambition should be to provide peace, prosperity and justice for its people. I don't think expansion is an acceptable ambition.

quote:

Do you fight for the return of land to Native Americans? Of course not. Because you recognize deep down that destiny and power are forever intertwined.

No, I don't fight for the return of the land because it is too late to do that humanely. And I don't believe Israel proper should be dismantled because it is too late to do that humanely. (To be clear, I wouldn't object to the Jews being there or having a state there in any case, but the expulsion of the Palestinians was a great injustice and should not have happened.)

But the settlements are new. They are not legal. It is not too late to dismantle them.

I do believe in apologies and compensation for those who were wronged, in both the earlier cases.

quote:

You call it colonialism. Seen clearly, it is the formative principle of history.

"History is the slaughterbench of nations."

You may be right. But I think we should aspire to a higher moral principle than "Might makes right." Hell, if we really believed that, we wouldn't mourn the Holocaust, would we? He with the most guns wins. It's human nature to dispossess and slaughter and destroy. Right?

quote:
I just think that Israel reacts the way they do because after witnessing 6 million of their people get slaughtered, they feel they don't want to ever see something like that happen again.

Of course. The militarism and violence are understandable. They just aren't okay when taken to these lengths.

[ 23 January 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 23 January 2003 11:28 PM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Have you or anyone here, any concern for Israel, the ideal of Israel? Surrounded by a mono-culture of Islam, why must the fledgling nation of Israel be multi-faith, ambitionless and cowering? Do you fight for the return of land to Native Americans? Of course not. Because you recognize deep down that destiny and power are forever intertwined. You call it colonialism. Seen clearly, it is the formative principle of history.

Yes some of us have a great concern for it. Fight for the return of land to Native Americans? Why would we have to? We've dealt the Indians a shitty hand throughout history and there's a lot more work to be done, but we're not firing guided missles into reservations. Isreal's been dealt a shitty hand, Palestine's been dealt a shitty hand. Everybody's been screwed over. We're all "victims".

The difference here is that we're looking at another situation that's come up time and time again through history. World War 2, the colonization of the Americas and Africa, and we have the potential to stop the worst from happening right before our eyes.

I reject your formative principle of history.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 23 January 2003 11:43 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I believe that the PA could do something about the suicide bombings in Israel, but turn a blind eye. I don't believe the IDF goes out with the purpose to kill innocent civilians either.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 23 January 2003 11:51 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No, neither do I. Most of those soldiers are just kids. I don't think the IDF is out to kill Palestinians - I just don't think they care as much as they should. I think they could work a lot harder at preventing those things from happening.
From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 23 January 2003 11:54 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Maybe they are. Israel, if they wanted, could just launch missles into the west bank but they don't. They put their soldiers out there.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 23 January 2003 11:56 PM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
True, but there are other reasons for doing that. You can't really use a missile to enforce a checkpoint, can you?

I mean, they could just bomb hell out of every Arab town in the region, but that'd be pretty hard to justify as "self-defence."


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 23 January 2003 11:56 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think arafat and the pa are the biggest reason why there is no peace over there.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 23 January 2003 11:57 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm talking about other stuff, like Jenin.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 23 January 2003 11:59 PM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You see Smith, I knew we could have a normal debate.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 24 January 2003 12:00 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mm. I see.

Idunno. It's hard to know who's most responsible for the situation, or what would really happen in different scenarios. Would things really improve for the Palestinians if the suicide bombings stopped? Would the bombings really stop if Israel withdrew the settlements? We can guess, but we can't know. And obviously, in any place where there are millions of people, there are going to be a lot of different opinions and motivations for action.


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 24 January 2003 12:03 AM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Of course we can't know. But I think Arafat has hurt the palestinians more than anyone.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 24 January 2003 12:05 AM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And yes, I believe things would improve immensley for the palestinians if the suicide bombings stopped. But it would take time.
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 24 January 2003 12:06 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, I can see that. Really, the man has no motivation to make things better for them. As soon as the war quiets down, they start looking at the other aspects of their lives that suck, and that's no good for him. He's not a peacetime politician; he's a terrorist, and that's all he knows how to be.
From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Cracker Jack
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3601

posted 24 January 2003 12:08 AM      Profile for Cracker Jack     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Smith, see, I ain't so bad am I ?
From: South Central | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 24 January 2003 01:12 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I believe that the PA could do something about the suicide bombings in Israel, but turn a blind eye. I don't believe the IDF goes out with the purpose to kill innocent civilians either.

This is the reality CJ: They have tried to, but with the increasing preassure of the occupation, more and more people are turning to extremeist elments both within Fatah, and outside, in organizations like Hamas. Cetainly there is an amount of complicity at the rank and file level of the PA, they do look the oher way, but you have to ask why?

Again, turn your attention away from that for a second and tell me, what is it that Israel has done to forward the peace process, other than bombing and bulldozing? It takes two to tango in both war and peace, and you have yet to produce an authentic piece of concrete evidence, that suggests that Sharon and co., are interested in anything other than annexing as much of the WB as is possible.


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 24 January 2003 01:17 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Yeah, I can see that. Really, the man has no motivation to make things better for them. As soon as the war quiets down, they start looking at the other aspects of their lives that suck, and that's no good for him. He's not a peacetime politician; he's a terrorist, and that's all he knows how to be.

Sorry Smith, this is way to easy. Arafat pushed Oslo down the throats of a very unwilling PLO. Don't forget it. Is it not the fact tha Fatah people benefited most from the sudden influx of aid that came into the WB and Gaza after Oslo. Many Palestinians resent him because they think he has used the 'peace' to line his own pockets. It is way to simple to just point a finger at both and say a pox on both your houses.

Please substantiate this claim you have made against Arafat. He may not be nice, but this does not mean that he is opposed to peace.


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Beechtree
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3511

posted 24 January 2003 01:20 PM      Profile for Beechtree        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If Fate allowed the west to take a different path, that is only because this west was convinced that it had the right to organize the rest of the world."
MD, the psychology here is accurate, yet I would not say this is a phenomenon unique to 'the west'. A mere cursory glance at the Chinese dynasties, the three kingdoms in Korea, the Mongol and Ottoman empires, or Japan in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, will show you this is the mark of the human species and not merely a white region in the west. The success story of the west has more to do with implementations of new technologies and the capacity to exercise dominance than anything else.

From: Hog Town | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Beechtree
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3511

posted 24 January 2003 02:37 PM      Profile for Beechtree        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
? I think a nation's ambition should be to provide peace, prosperity and justice for its people. I don't think expansion is an acceptable ambition.
Don't try to provide justice to the Jews. It would mean unspeakable horror for centuries to come.

As for expansion it is perhaps one of the most primary ambitions in the individual and in the race. I doubt you are exempt Smith. You will likely aquire property someday if you do not own it already. You will seek to expand the sphere of your interests and dominance. You will hurt and brush aside others in the process.

Prosperity? Its not a static concept. Prosperity entails expansion and dominance.

Peace... That's fine if you're plant-life. Perhaps you should graft yourself to a tree if you really want peace. As for the human animal peace means the capacity to subdue and deter hostile forces.


From: Hog Town | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 24 January 2003 02:49 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
MD, the psychology here is accurate, yet I would not say this is a phenomenon unique to 'the west'.

Well I thought you would agree. However I cheated. The above quote is this man:

It is the closing paragraph from his famous 1932 'Lebensraum' speech. All I did was replace the phrace 'white race' with the word 'west.'

You can find the full text of the master manipulator here. However, I will ask you who is the bigger fool, the manipulator, or the man who blindly follows his creed?


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 24 January 2003 02:57 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This thread has become bizarre. I don't quite understand how this happened.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 24 January 2003 02:58 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh look! 102 posts! Time to close the thread!
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca