TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Israel Kills Sheikh Yassin (Leader of Hamas)
Pages (9): « 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 »

quote:

Originally posted by dj_alfi uh no... your country is called Isreal, thus makes you an Israeli. You dont live in Jewdia do you? Jewdeism (spell check) is a religion.. NOT a nationality... moron

It seems we have a slight missunderstandnig.
Kreing, U have to remember that not everyone is taught Jewish history to the extent Jews do.

Alfi, Jewdaism is considered a religion but by many it is considered a nationallity that is no necassirily tied to the religion or the state of Israel, similar to the Druz (Sp?) or the Curds.

In these terms, Jewdaism is also like an origin. It was on this base that Hitler, for example, executed his persecution of Jews ... It did not matter whether you were religous or a secularis, Jewdaism runs in your blood.

quote:

Originally posted by dj_alfi uh no... your country is called Isreal, thus makes you an Israeli. You dont live in Jewdia do you? Jewdeism (spell check) is a religion.. NOT a nationality... moron

Well you obviously have no idea about what you are saying so I won't even bother�

ok, so i consulted the dictionary, and i must apologise for the comment above. It is tho the only race/origin that is also a religion.. so if you see it from my pov, there is room for misunderstanding...

quote:

Originally posted by mps242 Too bad that surrendering to the terrorists would mean no more clubbing.... Shariah doesn't seem to take too kindly to kufr trance music...

Jesus fucking Christ! Fucking Americans and their Hollywood view of the world! B-l-o-o-d-y H-e-l-l!!!

Get it through your thick head al-Qaida do not want to take over the world like a bloody James Bond baddy!

Give al-Qaida what they want means us out of Saudi Arabia...whats wrong with that?




Nice picture...reminds me of two English football chants...

"Your gonna get your fucking head kicked in!"

And

"Your goin home in the back of an ambulance!"

...also would love to see sharon in a box.

I personaly hate the israli government, nothing against the jewish people, just the gov.

quote:

Originally posted by trancaholic Please elaborate on that racist and overgeneralizing comment. Edit: That is, the second part - I won't be the one to question your first point.

I was alluding to that debate about the Swedish exhibition and that "Work of art" some months ago. Wasn't meant to be taken too seriously though. I take it back.

quote:

Originally posted by Vesa Another possibility that occurred to me is that Bush isn't doing very well in the polls, so Israel may be speeding up its actions against their enemies. Kerry might not be so understanding about Israel's operations, and therefore the timing might be more than a co-incidence. I'd like to hear a Middle-Eastern opinion about the possible link to US Elections.

This is purely opinon, but in this case I don't think so.

I think the current USA adminsitration has built up a very good relationship with Sharon (remember all the visits?), but that the relationship building has come to this conclusion: Sharon, you are free to take whatever action you think is necessary, we trust you to apply moderation to your efforts.

So in this specific case I very severly doubt that Sharon got, or asked, for a "greenlight". Even if they knew they weren't supposed to, Israelis wouldn't bother to ask over Yassin. He was 100% legit, even no one here, on the TA polit forum argues this point (they argue whether Yassin should have been killed and if it was the wisest decision to kill him, but not if he was a terrorist or a legit target).

People are just mad that Israel has balls, and they want to castrate them.

But continuing the other thought, the US adminstration has 'pulled out' of Israel so to speak, and given Sharon full understanding that they trust him to do what is best for all. I think the fact that Sharon isn't visiting the whitehouse as often bears testement to this.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus This is purely opinon, but in this case I don't think so. I think the current USA adminsitration has built up a very good relationship with Sharon (remember all the visits?), but that the relationship building has come to this conclusion: Sharon, you are free to take whatever action you think is necessary, we trust you to apply moderation to your efforts. So in this specific case I very severly doubt that Sharon got, or asked, for a "greenlight". Even if they knew they weren't supposed to, Israelis wouldn't bother to ask over Yassin. He was 100% legit, even no one here, on the TA polit forum argues this point (they argue whether Yassin should have been killed and if it was the wisest decision to kill him, but not if he was a terrorist or a legit target). People are just mad that Israel has balls, and they want to castrate them. But continuing the other thought, the US adminstration has 'pulled out' of Israel so to speak, and given Sharon full understanding that they trust him to do what is best for all. I think the fact that Sharon isn't visiting the whitehouse as often bears testement to this.

I would gladly castrate any israli solider who harms palestinians

quote:

Originally posted by the-un-named I would gladly castrate any israli solider who harms palestinians

Good luck, superman.

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus People are just mad that Israel has balls, and they want to castrate them.

Heh, I'd say that's about the most honest assessment in this entire thread.

I'll tell you exactly what is going to happen:

Hamas is going to carry out a suicide attack or two and say it was "retaliation" for the death of Yassin. What no one will ever realize, though, is that those same suicide bombers would have done the same thing anyway - but instead of saying it was a "retaliation" it would have just been your run of the mill "get the hell out of our land" attack.

After this, all these people who are saying this is going to make things worse are going to say, "See! We told you they would retaliate!" And they'll honestly believe that the killing of Yassin has "fueled" terrorism - despite the fact that there is no evidence to suggest it will, nor will there ever be any evidence to suggest that it did.

But don't take my word for it: just watch.

quote:

Originally posted by Flotser lol i gotta use this one too

DigiNut stole my line the asshole!

Grrrrr...



MrS

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Get it through your thick head al-Qaida do not want to take over the world like a bloody James Bond baddy! Give al-Qaida what they want means us out of Saudi Arabia...whats wrong with that?

We are out of Saudi Arabia. Giving into what they want would be a religious fundementalist middle east. Of course by then "what they want" will probably evolve into something else.

quote:

Originally posted by occrider We are out of Saudi Arabia. Giving into what they want would be a religious fundementalist middle east. Of course by then "what they want" will probably evolve into something else.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Saudi Arabia have the largest reserves of oil in the world...?

quote:

Originally posted by occrider We are out of Saudi Arabia. Giving into what they want would be a religious fundementalist middle east. Of course by then "what they want" will probably evolve into something else.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Saudi Arabia have the largest reserves of oil in the world...?

Still, I fail to see how anyone with half a brain cell could possibly think al-Qaida want to take over the world? Maybe a large slice of it in the Muslim part, but we dont live there do we?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Saudi Arabia have the largest reserves of oil in the world...? Still, I fail to see how anyone with half a brain cell could possibly think al-Qaida want to take over the world? Maybe a large slice of it in the Muslim part, but we dont live there do we?

So what's your argument? That Saudi Arabia should not sell oil to the west? That we should "get out" of Saudi Arabia by having absolutely nothing to do with the state? Furthermore, it's well established that Al-Qaeda's goals are not to take over the world ... that's pure silliness. But what they want is to establish their extremist ideaology over the masses of the middle east. Something the masses do NOT genearlly want (unless you are making the claim that the middle east in general wants an extremist fundamentalist state). Shall we help them overthrow the middle east governments then to give them what they want? Come now, that mentality is simply going to espouse more terrorism from every idealogical based group across the board as a means to acheive change.

I said earlier the comments were tongue in cheek.

quote:

Shall we help them overthrow the middle east governments then to give them what they want?

I think that would be the stupidest idea ever, unfortunately that is the path the US goverment and its allies have chosen to take, and is also the path favoured by most of the less informed supporters of America's war on terror...

(And if you cant work out what that means I'll be glad to give you an explanation )

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley I said earlier the comments were tongue in cheek. I think that would be the stupidest idea ever, unfortunately that is the path the US goverment and its allies have chosen to take, and is also the path favoured by most of the less informed supporters of America's war on terror... (And if you cant work out what that means I'll be glad to give you an explanation )

i get it, but whats your alternative?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley I think that would be the stupidest idea ever, unfortunately that is the path the US goverment and its allies have chosen to take, and is also the path favoured by most of the less informed supporters of America's war on terror... (And if you cant work out what that means I'll be glad to give you an explanation )

Iraq, possibly, Afghanistan however I would disagree ...

quote:

Originally posted by DrUg_Tit0 Heh, I kinda agree with melech mike/shlomo hamalek/ilan yosef here.

The first and last nicks... not the middle!

Hey, on the bright side, now Yassin really is the spiritual leader of Hamas.

Hahahahahahahahaha!

quote:

Originally posted by Yoepus i get it, but whats your alternative?

OK, lets get this straight, I dont think appeasment should be the way to deal with evey terrorist situation, but I do think it should be in the back of our minds when dealing with them.

From what I have seen throughout history, despite the tactics used, 9 times out of 10, the "terrorists" have had a legitimate concern that has been behind the decision to take to arms.

You have to look at each separate situation and ask yourselves, "why are they doing this". But you have to do this truthfully and not become blinded by revenge or nationalism or pride. That is the hard part and I cannot recall a situation, bar Northern Ireland (which I think should be the bench mark for dealing with any kind of terrorism) where this has happened.

Everytime I see an MP on the telly talking about al-Qaida I want to scream. Either they are fucking stupid, or they are trying to manipulate public oppinion to meet there own agenda. Everytime they are asked why al-Qaida are doing this they give the same rehersed answer, "You have to understand, that al-Qaida hate and despise the West, our values and our democratic beliefs, this is why they are attacking us" NO!!! Ok, so they hate what we stand for, but why would they want to kill us for it?

You have to go a lot further and not rely on simplicity like what I have talked about above. It was not hard to find out what al-Qaida actually stood for or wanted, and if they had that (if any terrorist had what they were attacking for in the first place) they wouldn't attack - makes sense no?

It is a hell of a lot more easier in Israel - the Palestinians want their own state. Well why dont you just do that? Not in little bits here and there and just go back to the begining. Do it ALL, NOW! Why dont you pull out of the occupied terrirtories and totally close your borders (and dont take the piss with the borders!!)? If you did that and stopped all military action inside Palestine, then the only support any militants would have would be from the fundamentalists (and I believe that they are only small and would dwindle away after a few decades) as the normal Palestinians would have what they wanted and could not justify attacking Israel any more (Might not turn out as nice as that but if it didn't then nobody could criticise Israel like they do now could they? )

However, when we take the simplistic approach to terrorism, like what we normally do, and when we get blinded by emotion, thats when things can only get worse...

When we let our emotions take over, we lash out. When we lash out, we make the reasons terrorists attack us much worse, and inevitabally, more people will have cause for concern and will begin to support the reasons terrorists attack, thereby making the threat to us a hell of a lot worse. We have seen this in Iraq. The Presidency became blinded by emotion after 11/9 (which most Americans by the look of it did). They wanted to lash out and they did. They got it right first time (Afghanistan) as bin Laden's operation needed to have the plug pulled on it (or at least hampered as al-Qaida are all over the world). But America was not content. It wanted more revenge. It chose Iraq...but why? Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with al-Qaida, so attacking Iraq as part of the war on terror did not make sense rationally. But America has been acting unrationally (emotionally) since 11/9 and Iraq laughed when that happened, and for that, they paid.

But that has made things so much worse...look at Madrid. Attacking Iraq in no way whatsoever helped us against terrorism, and as the Spanish found out to their cost, it had exactly the opposite effect.

The same happens in Israel. Revenge attacks and airstrikes are common after a suicide bombing. But thats all they are, revenge. They obviously dont work or we would have seen an end to Palestinian violence a long time ago. What actually happens is that ordinary Palestinians, terrorised by the Israelis (cos who says terrorism cannot be commited by a soveriegn government?) support attacks against the aggressors (revenge again?)

I dont have any answers of how to eliminate terrorism completely Yoepus, but what I do know for a fact is that the bigger the terrorist organisation, the more dangerous it is. The more support a terrorist organistation gets the bigger it becomes...and people support terrorist organisations when they become threatened by the terrorist's enemy, or when the terrorist's enemy starts acting like the bad guy, and the "terrorist" organisation becomes the saviour...

Now our behaviour is something we can control

Well Georgey, glad you posted what you posted. At least know I get a comprehensive picture of how you think about this issue, which if I can sum it up in one sentance is a European approach to an Arab problem

You are assuming one critical thing here, that Arabs/Palestinians think like you, they don't. Altough we are all human and share some core beliefs and morality, culture has a very huge impact on the way we think and feel.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley From what I have seen throughout history, despite the tactics used, 9 times out of 10, the "terrorists" have had a legitimate concern that has been behind the decision to take to arms.

First of all thats your opinion, which I find quiet ammusing for this reason: If they were a "legitimate" concern, they could have addressed it with in the system. By their very nature, terrorist have "illegitimate" concerns, or they would have tried the legitimate course of action first. (Even the USA pre Iraq tried the 'legitimate' UN route, before force).

The concerns are very illegitimate, they are only legitimaized through violence, that works with people with you, I refuse to allow that to work with people like me, as I wish people to work with in the legal constructs as much as possible. In the UN thread, this seems to be your thought on it as well.

quote:

The same happens in Israel. Revenge attacks and airstrikes are common after a suicide bombing. But thats all they are, revenge. They obviously dont work or we would have seen an end to Palestinian violence a long time ago.

Well what do you want Israel to do? Let the terrorist attack and never retaliate? To give the terrorist a green light and let the kill as many Israelis as they like without fear of any consequences?

Retaliations, even if you believe they are revenge are essential. This is what all human moral ideology and laws are based upon. If a thief steals, shall we just let him continue to steal, and steal, and steal?

quote:

What actually happens is that ordinary Palestinians, terrorised by the Israelis (cos who says terrorism cannot be commited by a soveriegn government?) support attacks against the aggressors (revenge again?)

Again above comments. Of course you are morally equating justice with crime in this context. You are telling me, people are more likely to steal if they get caught, because the police make them angry when they see someone getting arrested. Even if this is true, it does not stop the fact that the police should arrest a criminal - regardless of how popular the criminal is and regardless of how mad that makes the people who know the criminal feel about the police that arrested him.

If the police arrested my brother for stealing, I'd be mad too!

quote:

I dont have any answers of how to eliminate terrorism completely Yoepus, but what I do know for a fact is that the bigger the terrorist organisation, the more dangerous it is.

And I don't have an answer on how to eliminate crime. I think terrorism, like crime will always exist. And I agree with you, tbe bigger the criminal organization, the more dangerous it is.

I just differ in you because I believe that police work, actively going after a criminal organization, breaking it up, making sure there are no mafias makes a criminal organization smaller, and that letting the crime families live untouched allows them to gorw bigger.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley OK, lets get this straight, I dont think appeasment should be the way to deal with evey terrorist situation, but I do think it should be in the back of our minds when dealing with them. From what I have seen throughout history, despite the tactics used, 9 times out of 10, the "terrorists" have had a legitimate concern that has been behind the decision to take to arms. You have to look at each separate situation and ask yourselves, "why are they doing this". But you have to do this truthfully and not become blinded by revenge or nationalism or pride. That is the hard part and I cannot recall a situation, bar Northern Ireland (which I think should be the bench mark for dealing with any kind of terrorism) where this has happened.

This line of reasoning would be valid if (and only if) "each seperate [terrorist] situation" existed in a vacuum. However, they do not.

The inevitable result of even the slightest degree of appeasement of terrorists is the further legitimization of terrorism as a means of obtaining political redress. It sends the message to every single disgruntled political figure around the world that terrorism might be an effective tool for them to employ to obtain their objectives.

This is not acceptable. While in the short-term, it might seem possible to save lives through appeasement of a single group who are resorting to terrorism, the long term consequence of any such appeasement will be more terrorism. Perhaps from the same group, perhaps from a different group. But the fact remains: appeasement will not stop (or even slow) terrorism, it will only popularize it.

We need to send a strong and united message that any political group which resorts to terrorism will not have their concerns addressed, regardless of the legitimacy of those concerns, until such a time as they cease to resort to such an illegitimate means of obtaining political redress.

quote:

Everytime I see an MP on the telly talking about al-Qaida I want to scream. Either they are fucking stupid, or they are trying to manipulate public oppinion to meet there own agenda. Everytime they are asked why al-Qaida are doing this they give the same rehersed answer, "You have to understand, that al-Qaida hate and despise the West, our values and our democratic beliefs, this is why they are attacking us" NO!!! Ok, so they hate what we stand for, but why would they want to kill us for it? You have to go a lot further and not rely on simplicity like what I have talked about above. It was not hard to find out what al-Qaida actually stood for or wanted, and if they had that (if any terrorist had what they were attacking for in the first place) they wouldn't attack - makes sense no?

No, it doesn't make sense, because you are severely oversimplifying the nature of human behavior. Suppose you have a young child, and the child throws a tantrum if you refuse to buy him a candy bar. If you give in and buy him the candy bar, it may satisfy him - temporarily. But what do you think is going to happen next time he wants something and you refuse to give it to him?

Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and every other terrorist organization on this planet would love us to believe that all we have to do in order to stop their terrorist attacks is to comply with their immediate demands. But that's simply not realistic. If we give in to their demands, the next time something comes up that they aren't content with - and it probably won't take long - the bombing will start again, and we will have gained nothing from appeasing them the first time.

Not only that, but as I already stressed, other groups may perceive the success that those groups attained as a product of the terrorist methodology, and begin to employ similar tactics themselves.

Anyone who believes that appeasement of any terrorist organization will cause a long-term reduction in terrorist activities is suffering from a serious case of intellectual myopia.

quote:

When we let our emotions take over, we lash out. When we lash out, we make the reasons terrorists attack us much worse, and inevitabally, more people will have cause for concern and will begin to support the reasons terrorists attack, thereby making the threat to us a hell of a lot worse. We have seen this in Iraq. The Presidency became blinded by emotion after 11/9 (which most Americans by the look of it did). They wanted to lash out and they did. They got it right first time (Afghanistan) as bin Laden's operation needed to have the plug pulled on it (or at least hampered as al-Qaida are all over the world). But America was not content. It wanted more revenge. It chose Iraq...but why? Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with al-Qaida, so attacking Iraq as part of the war on terror did not make sense rationally. But America has been acting unrationally (emotionally) since 11/9 and Iraq laughed when that happened, and for that, they paid.

I agree that we need to be calm and measured in our responses to terrorism if those responses are to be effective, targeting terrorists themselves and minimizing any harm to innocent civilians. However, I do not believe appeasement can be a valid or useful part of such a strategy.

quote:

But that has made things so much worse...look at Madrid. Attacking Iraq in no way whatsoever helped us against terrorism, and as the Spanish found out to their cost, it had exactly the opposite effect.

There is no way to know what would have happened if Spain did not assist in the war in Iraq. There is no proof that the attack would not have occurred anyway. Even if it wouldn't have, there is no evidence that the same resources, both economic and human, would not have been diverted to terrorist activity elsewhere.

quote:

The same happens in Israel. Revenge attacks and airstrikes are common after a suicide bombing. But thats all they are, revenge. They obviously dont work or we would have seen an end to Palestinian violence a long time ago. What actually happens is that ordinary Palestinians, terrorised by the Israelis (cos who says terrorism cannot be commited by a soveriegn government?) support attacks against the aggressors (revenge again?)

Israel has an inconsistent record of appropriate responses to terrorist attacks. In many cases, they cause unnecessary damage to civilians and civilian infrastructure which most likely only contributes to the terrorist threat. However, targeted attacks directed at known terrorist leaders, such as Yassin, are highly appropriate.

quote:

I dont have any answers of how to eliminate terrorism completely Yoepus, but what I do know for a fact is that the bigger the terrorist organisation, the more dangerous it is. The more support a terrorist organistation gets the bigger it becomes...and people support terrorist organisations when they become threatened by the terrorist's enemy, or when the terrorist's enemy starts acting like the bad guy, and the "terrorist" organisation becomes the saviour... Now our behaviour is something we can control

Our behavior is certainly something we can control, and I agree tha there are significant improvements we could make toward the end of fighting terrorism. Unfortunately, I believe that the suggestion that appeasement - even in the most mundane sense - is not and can not be one such improvement.

Terrorism may never be eliminated completely. However, if we do not wish for it to further perpetuate itself, we cannot, under any circumstances, allow it to appear to be a successful ideology.

quote:

You are assuming one critical thing here, that Arabs/Palestinians think like you, they don't

Beliefs like that really piss me off, and it is a belief that is pressured onto us by people with ulterior motives, in the Israeli case, justifying their actions against Arabs

Hitler used the same ploy against the Jews in Nazi Germany, summat I'm sure is very close to your heart? To the Germans, the Jews were viewed as being different and not able to think and act like the rest of the population. The only way they could be dealt with was...well, you know

Its just ignorant stereotyping and it simply amounts to racism

Yes, to damn fucking right I think Arabs are just like me. I happen to know many Muslims, and have had the pleasure of meeting a great deal more, and guess what? Every last one of em WAS exactly the same as me

What makes you think that our societies and culture is any different to that of Islam? Is America not full of fundamentalist Christians? What about the settlers in the occupied terrirtories on their quest for the Greater Israel...religious fundamentalists. Whats makes them any different to al-Qaida? None of them respect any other cultures and would almost definately support the killing of anyone they deemed 'infidels' or 'kafir' or 'gentiles' if they tried to exhert an influence over the land they claimed was theirs. Fortunatley, their veiws represent a minority (despite the amount of power they may have in the governemnts of Israel or America) and that, I suspect, is exactly the same for any Islamic state

And your police/crime anology is just about as good as your 'man gets slapped' anology...ie not very

quote:

First of all thats your opinion, which I find quiet ammusing for this reason: If they were a "legitimate" concern, they could have addressed it with in the system. By their very nature, terrorist have "illegitimate" concerns, or they would have tried the legitimate course of action first. (Even the USA pre Iraq tried the 'legitimate' UN route, before force)

How could they have addressed it in their system? A legitimate concern simply means their actions could be seen as being justified. The American revolution - merely terrorism. The Irish rebellion - merely terrorism. The Palestinian rebellion - merely terrorism. But nobody can say that these three groups did not have a legitimate concern due to the fact that they are oppressed...

quote:

Retaliations, even if you believe they are revenge are essential

What an idiotic statement to make. And I assume that applies across the board? To the Palestinians who will avenge the death of the spiritual leader of Hamas?

quote:

I just differ in you because I believe that police work, actively going after a criminal organization, breaking it up, making sure there are no mafias makes a criminal organization smaller, and that letting the crime families live untouched allows them to gorw bigger

Superb! Absolutley superb! Shame we are discussing ways of reducing the risk of terrorism and what you have just said has nothing what so ever to do with it.

Do us a favour mate, next time you post, leave the silly simplistic anologies out and focus on the issues instead why dont you?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Hitler used the same ploy against the Jews in Nazi Germany, summat I'm sure is very close to your heart? To the Germans, the Jews were viewed as being different and not able to think and act like the rest of the population. The only way they could be dealt with was...well, you know

The Jews were different than the Germans. I'm not going to try and pretend they weren't. To the German population, Jews were different able able not able to think or act like the rest of the population, no they were viewed to be able to think and act better than the rest of the population.

Whatever it was, the Jews were sitll culturally different then the Germans, if that makes me agree with Hitler so be it. Its all a matter of balance. Do I think Arabs are different than Europeans? Yes. Do I think they all deserve to be slaughtered because of it? No.

Other than shockvalue, I don't know what you are trying to go for here. I'm sure you agree with many things that Hitler thought too - after all he was a socialist Its all a matter of balance and extreme.

quote:

Its just ignorant stereotyping and it simply amounts to racism

Great so stop stereotyping me as a racist. :

quote:

Yes, to damn fucking right I think Arabs are just like me. I happen to know many Muslims, and have had the pleasure of meeting a great deal more, and guess what? Every last one of em WAS exactly the same as me

I know many Muslims too, but are they '100%' Arab? Most Arabs on this forum aren't. They have had the cultural experiences of both western and middle eastern culture. Just like I share the culture of both Israel, the Jewish people, and the West.

Most Arabs do not share this cultural understanding (and yes I am generalizing here, not stereotyping) - they have lived under only one culture, a culture that is very xenophobic.

You have also lived under one culture, however it is very accepting of other ways of life. It advocates moral relativism, understanding, diplomacy, appeasement, a "Can't we all just get along", a "live and let live" mentality.

It is understandable than to believe that you can not think otherwise, or can comprehend that people can think other than you do. That all must be accepting as culturally as you are.

quote:

What makes you think that our societies and culture is any different to that of Islam?

So you think there is no difference? Look at the basic virtues that each culture prides itself upon.

Western culture is based on money, merit, liberity, freedom, and equality.

Arab culture values honor, heredity, family, conservatisim, and faith.

If the core values of a society are different, why do you believe the socieites will produce the same results? the same people that think just like you.

I would be suprised if you told me, heres a westerner, heres a Middle Easterner, I'm gonna bet $1000 they think exactly a like on a slew of issues.

quote:

And your police/crime anology is just about as good as your 'man gets slapped' anology...ie not very

Ahh you didn't like it ? Why not? I try.. I try...

quote:

The American revolution - merely terrorism.

The Americans had legit complaints (altought I admit they were a tad on the extremist side) and they tried to address them through legitimate means before they used force. The legitimate means didn't work because they fell on deaf, or rather mad ears.

quote:

What an idiotic statement to make. And I assume that applies across the board? To the Palestinians who will avenge the death of the spiritual leader of Hamas?

Well you are assuming that Hamas repersents the moral and legal authority of the Palestinian people a weight equal to the legitimacy granted to a military force of a soveriegn nation such as the IDF>

If you are willing to make that assumption, then yes, you would hav e to beleive that they are entitled to revenge.

If you believe they are criminals, a group of terrorist that don't repersent the will of the Palestinian people then reference my police/cop analogy.

You probably won't be able to understand this however, as its counter to your cultural upbrinings of moral relativisim

quote:

Do us a favour mate, next time you post, leave the silly simplistic anologies out and focus on the issues instead why dont you?

Thats the thing. This issue is not complex. It surely isn't complex to the Arabs, and the minds of the Palestinian (most of who don't have Univeristy educations and are aware of thoughts like yours). Its a very simple issue to them, they understand it with clarity. And Israel's response to this can be evaluated complexly if you like, but they are dealing with a simple conflict, and the way it deals with it can easily be interperted simply.

Go out see the world, you'll realize not everyone thinks the same as you. I'll agree most people FEEL the same way as you do, but think.. thats a whole 'nother realm.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.