|
Will you oppose an holocaust on Israel right now? (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
oh you mean like what the Spanish and Portuguese did to Native Americans? |
Colonialism is a bitch...:( |
|
|
| Q5echo |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Colonialism is a bitch...:( |
...and for the most part unavoidable;) |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
...and for the most part unavoidable;) |
If you're a spineless **** yes... |
|
|
| DJ UD |
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
If you're a spineless **** yes... |
That made absolutely no sense what so ever. We had no idea what was in America when we settled and the British, having already started colonies on various other places in the world knew a thing or two on how to start them. Once we had established colonies we had no choice but to push inwards into the U.S. The problem came about when the ideology of our country conflicted with that of the Native Americans. Weather or not they were hostile towards us to start off with was besides the point, we needed the land, we had an established way of controlling things that was threated by the Native Americans. WE then put them on reservations some wouldn't do it so we attacked them, we won.. THE END. It was not a war against races it was a war against life styles, ours just happened to be more popular. So technically yes colonialism was unavoidable and, I don't see how that makes you a spineless ****. |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ UD
That made absolutely no sense what so ever. We had no idea what was in America when we settled and the British, having already started colonies on various other places in the world knew a thing or two on how to start them. Once we had established colonies we had no choice but to push inwards into the U.S. The problem came about when the ideology of our country conflicted with that of the Native Americans. Weather or not they were hostile towards us to start off with was besides the point, we needed the land, we had an established way of controlling things that was threated by the Native Americans. WE then put them on reservations some wouldn't do it so we attacked them, we won.. THE END. It was not a war against races it was a war against life styles, ours just happened to be more popular. So technically yes colonialism was unavoidable and, I don't see how that makes you a spineless ****. |
shaolin lives in a world that doesn't exist. one where everyone gets along and people always do the right things. It's a noble place, but one solely in shaolin's head. ;) |
|
|
| shaolin_Z |
Let's say it's safe to assume you would never consider suffering the same experience as having any justification whatsoever.
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ UD
That made absolutely no sense what so ever. We had no idea what was in America when we settled and the British, having already started colonies on various other places in the world knew a thing or two on how to start them. Once we had established colonies we had no choice but to push inwards into the U.S. The problem came about when the ideology of our country conflicted with that of the Native Americans. Weather or not they were hostile towards us to start off with was besides the point, we needed the land, we had an established way of controlling things that was threated by the Native Americans. WE then put them on reservations some wouldn't do it so we attacked them, we won.. THE END. It was not a war against races it was a war against life styles, ours just happened to be more popular. So technically yes colonialism was unavoidable and, I don't see how that makes you a spineless ****. |
^^^
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ UD
That made absolutely no sense what so ever. |
...and it onlt makes sense if the assumption is that:
- wants / greed (with simloutaneous utter disregard for the other) = need
- ...and that this entire framework and standard of evaluation is:
Hence the conlusion is:
Based on complete dishonesty (from 1) and hypocrisy (from 1 and 2), your arguments stands if and only if we ignore:
- a lack of principles == uncivlized
- the prior in comination with genocidal means for an cumaltive acts of theft == savagery
- from the previous two it follows that one has no courage, ethical sense of behaviour, honor, or dignity
hence:
| quote: | Originally posted by shaolin_Z
If you're a spineless **** yes... |
Q.E.D (Quod Erat Demonstrandum) |
|
|
| LazFX |
| quote: | Originally posted by DJ UD
WE then put them on reservations some wouldn't do it so we attacked them, we won.. THE END. It was not a war against races it was a war against life styles, ours just happened to be more popular. |
it wasn't that it was More Popular. What are you, in ing high school??
it was manifest destiny
 |
|
|
| pmoisse |
| quote: | Originally posted by LazFX
|
Quoted for sheer awesomeness. Well played, Laz!!! |
|
|
| Fir3start3r |
| quote: | Originally posted by LazFX
it wasn't that it was More Popular. What are you, in ing high school??
|
LOL!
The question is ludicrous at best.
The mere suggestion smacks of it being rhetorical.
The Palestinians have done nothing in the way of resolution for themselves - even when it's practically handed to them.
The latest breakdown in talks is evidence enough.
It's a sad situation for sure, but the 'Palestinians' need to get a hold on their own rank and file rather than shrugging it off and posing for the photo-op to garner sympathy every time Israel reacts to a bombing/rocketing.
When will they learn that they need to be at the negotiation table and stay there? |
|
|
| jerZ07002 |
| quote: | Originally posted by LazFX
it wasn't that it was More Popular. What are you, in ing high school??
it was manifest destiny
|
haha...i agree, nice post. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by rewind_plz
You mean you are opposed to dictionary defination of WW2 genocide in all its forms, right?
You are aware that Israel is commiting a genocide in Palestine right now, right? Or are you blind?:conf: |
No, I mean I'm opposed to genocide in all it's forms, as I said in the first post. Two wrongs certainly don't make a right. |
|
|
| DJ UD |
| quote: | Originally posted by LazFX
it wasn't that it was More Popular. What are you, in ing high school??
it was manifest destiny
|
True it was a manifest destiny. But it was more popular, all established civilizations at that time had the same goal as to expand (i.e. spain, france, germany, russia, england). It was only was only pertinent that we expand towards the Pacific becuase 1. we had to prove ourselves to the rest of the world as a new nation, and 2. we had settlers already moving out west before it became a manifest destiny. Since the Spanish had already pretty much taken the Pacific seaboard france had somewhat occupied the in between. Of course we went in with the idea of making the indans join our civilization one way of another we never went in their just to kill them all and get them out the way.
Tuveson quote, p. 91.
| quote: | | Manifest Destiny was always a general notion rather than a specific policy. The term combined a belief in expansionism with other popular ideas of the era |
|
|
|
|
|
