Originally posted by: RichardE
Perhaps you are correct, though under that assumption of what defines true evil you could make the case for many modern figures to be "reincarnates" of Hitler.
I get whiplash between yoiur morally outrageous statements, and then your reasonable agreement when I point that out. I have to give you one thing, few can admit what you do.
You mistake being blind to the problem of settlements for understanding there are more to this issue than just the settlements. It is like saying "The assassination of a duke caused World War I!" when ignoring all the build up to and, and the other issues surrounding it.
No, I really don't. You could address my issue with one simple inclusion of the settlements as an appropriate part of the issue, but instead, you seem to completely ignore them.
I have no problem with your addressing the settlements and going on to many other issues.
You're committing the 'straw man' fallacy by misrepresenting my position, as if I said the assassination of Ferdinand was the only cause, instead of my actually saying you don't mention it - and by the way, you stuff some extra straw in the man by conflating a one time 'trigger event' with the assassination, with the larger role of the settlements as on ongoing, chronic, strategically important issue affecting the chances for peace.
Yes, the settlements are the cause for friction
One of my guilty pleasures is enjoying the language of propaganda as I watch ideologues minimize the important. Yes, that's all they are, a 'cause for friction'.
Not a very important intentional wrongful policy by one nation against a people that is a significant issue in one of the world's leading conflicts in violation of international law.
Not probably the most flagrant violation of the United Nations' expression of world opinion, protected as they are by the US veto. Just a tiny little 'cause for conflict'. Nothing to see.
Amazing. No wonder you have such a hard time with any perspective on the issue.
, but do you think if Israel withdrew it would all fix itself?
Wow, there's gonna be a shortage of straw if you kep making these men. Now, you replace my statements with saying things would 'fix themselves'.
Of course not. There are larger issues and there needs to be a larger agreement. But recognizing this as an issue, which you have failed to do IMO (though you will certainly say it is a 'cauf of friction' that can be addressed once the Palestenians are, say as you have called for previously, all murdered) is important to the situation. It's like working out a fence dispute with your neighbor without addressing the fact he moves it a foot further in your yard every night and resets the 'negotiating parameters'.
Or would the people than need Israel support for infrastructure, and Israel support for trade? Would Hamas be willing to become a real government or would it use it's new land to continue its crusade of "Death to Israel".
The fact that you ask that question rhetorically because you are convinced the Palestinians will only always try to kill all Israelis is why you are 'part of the problem'.
You call me blind towards the issue of the settlements, you are blind to the issues surrounding the settlements and thinking beyond the solution to see what other problems it will cause.
That's incredibly weak, and that's saying something considering the post preceding it was your calling for genocide.
It's like OJ looking at someone accusing him of murder and saying that the accuser is no better - based on nothing but his insane defensive unwillingless to admit his error.
Nothing I said has been 'blind to the issues surrounding the settlements'. Nothing has been lacking in 'other problems it might cause'.
If you see the settlements as part of the process of getting rid of all the Palestinians, then your comments make some logical sense, as morally wrong as they are.
But otherwise they're terribly lacking. Nowhere have I said not to address the larger issues including Israel's security concerns.
We're talking at cross purposes here - me as someone talking about a solution with justice for both sides, you pursuing an agenda of 'genocide as the only solution'. So our quibbling over these details is not going to get very far when we're not on the same page on that basic issue.
And the settlements have not provided, as you imply, protection for Israel from Palestinian attacks. They're simply injustices and part of a larger effort driving Palestenians out.
They're a crime. They take the best land, most of the water, they have the only useful roads across Palestinian lands while Palestinians spend hours in 'checkpoints' in their fragmented communities. They're indefensible, as pretty much every nation in the world besides Israel and the corrupt US say. You're advocating nothing but a position of wrong here. If you were in the shoes of the Palestinians, you would sound very different (or perhaps as a mirror, just calling for the genocide of the Jews as the only solution).