Israel getting what it deserves

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: jackpot

Originally posted by: SnapIT

I'm worried that israel won't retaliate, and lets itself be terrorised by hamas and friends. Reminds me of the holocaust. That's what I'm scared of. I don't have an answer for peace, but I think it is only human to retaliate when being attacked.

I'm worried they will, then Hamas will, then Israel will... the neverending story... i can think of a good peaceful solution, they simply stop killing eachother...

I wonder if you could describe just EXACTLY this is like the holocaust, it involves Jews being killed, but nothing more...

Is it human to defend yourself when being attacked, sure, retaliate even, but if so, against the real enemy, killing innocent people has nothing to do with retaliation, if i kill your mom you kill mine and the problem is solved?

No, the jews being involved is only a coincidence....or is it? When I see the jews during WW2, I see passive people who wouldn't revolt against their german captures even though they were enslaved and then slaughtered in the millions. That is a tradegy not unlike the black slave situation our world had known for hundreds of years. One ended in complete tradegy because America acted too late to stop them, and the other ended slowly yet suddenly with an executive order by Lincoln. Following this story, the blacks achieved equality a hundred years later through passive resistance, even though they were being linched and killed by whites without punishment.

If you ask me, that is how you beat that type of conflict. First through a government proclamation, and then slowly through peaceful display. Repeat if necessary.

The arabs are fighting over land claiming a religous war that will not be over till israel is irradicated, the black didn't even have their freedom but fought peacefully to gain it back throughout a hundred years. Which do you have more respect for?

Is it a coincidence? No, of course not, the same land that the Jews claim to be their holyland is the same as the arabs do... so no, it is not a coincidence, but if it was anglo-catholics that lived there, the situation would be pretty much the same, of that i am sure...

As i have already stated about a hundred times in this thread, i think that both sides are wrong to kill innocents, actually, i think the whole war is wrong and that peace is the only solution...

There is a pretty huge difference here though, if you want to compare it to the black slave situation... actually, you can't really compare those two situations at all...

Peace in this situation can only be reach from negotiations and both sides have to make sacrifices, or the war will never end...

 

[Moonbeam]

Very interesting post, Stark. Fascinating to see war analyzed with cold reason and an eye to pragmatic outcome. Very Machiavellian. The problem I have with it would be similar to my critique of the market, there exists around the analysis a kind of vacuum, a failure of understanding as to what is value, what are desirable outcomes, what are the effects on the psyche. I see in your analysis, the hand of Evil, the cunning mind at work, the calculator the strategist, the future oriented goal seeker. Because man does not know for what he seeks he has the fantasy it lies in victory. I think the real victory lies in defeat, the death of the ego. When that happens war, violence and hate disappear and the real man, the real victor, the undefeatable one emerges. From that vantage I think the analysis you quoted is revealed as nothing more than what I have alluded to before, a sophisticated form of self justification based on the need to avoid feelings of guilt. War is a limitation of vision, a form of mental illness.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Very interesting post, Stark. Fascinating to see war analyzed with cold reason and an eye to pragmatic outcome. Very Machiavellian. The problem I have with it would be similar to my critique of the market, there exists around the analysis a kind of vacuum, a failure of understanding as to what is value, what are desirable outcomes, what are the effects on the psyche. I see in your analysis, the hand of Evil, the cunning mind at work, the calculator the strategist, the future oriented goal seeker. Because man does not know for what he seeks he has the fantasy it lies in victory. I think the real victory lies in defeat, the death of the ego. When that happens war, violence and hate disappear and the real man, the real victor, the undefeatable one emerges. From that vantage I think the analysis you quoted is revealed as nothing more than what I have alluded to before, a sophisticated form of self justification based on the need to avoid feelings of guilt. War is a limitation of vision, a form of mental illness.

You know... LSD isn't good for you in the long run...

 

[Nefrodite]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Very interesting post, Stark. Fascinating to see war analyzed with cold reason and an eye to pragmatic outcome. Very Machiavellian. The problem I have with it would be similar to my critique of the market, there exists around the analysis a kind of vacuum, a failure of understanding as to what is value, what are desirable outcomes, what are the effects on the psyche. I see in your analysis, the hand of Evil, the cunning mind at work, the calculator the strategist, the future oriented goal seeker. Because man does not know for what he seeks he has the fantasy it lies in victory. I think the real victory lies in defeat, the death of the ego. When that happens war, violence and hate disappear and the real man, the real victor, the undefeatable one emerges. From that vantage I think the analysis you quoted is revealed as nothing more than what I have alluded to before, a sophisticated form of self justification based on the need to avoid feelings of guilt. War is a limitation of vision, a form of mental illness.

and it is also a reality. if we hadn't fought a war you would be either wearing a nazi arm band or dead already for your views.


under your system of values you would simply let hitler kill you to preserve your stance against all violence

 

[Nefrodite]

Does anyone think that you could "reasonably" apply some of the same the logic that the US used in using the atomic bomb during WWII to the palestinians using suicide bombs against the israelis? More specifically, since military service in mandatory for israeli males (females?) would discriminate bombing of large groups of israeli males be considered OK since they are, were, or would be part of the IDF force?

because, in the overall gross calculations of war, less people will died in total because of the two atomic bombs forcing japan to surrender that way. the palestinians have no such goal, they want to maximize casualities over the long run for total elimination. their goal is genocide.

It is pointless arguing with you, i am saying both sides commit crimes against humanity when they bomb civilians, you think only Israel has the right to do so...

I ask you, if the Palestines (not hamas) were to send a bomb into a city to kill who they think is a terrorist, Sharon, and killing several civilians while doing so, would you still stand by your statement? Would you still say that "in a war against terrorists you have to break a few eggs"?

I stand by my statement in both directions, i do not have to choose sides here, both are guilty of terrorism as far as i am concerned...

and taking your reasoning to its logical conclusion the US is also responsible for crimes against humanity. that the US is a terrorist. in your world, everyones equally a terrorist. Hitlers a terrorist, but so are the allies. we're all evil. thats all i said, and thats what you continue to make the case for.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Very interesting post, Stark. Fascinating to see war analyzed with cold reason and an eye to pragmatic outcome. Very Machiavellian. The problem I have with it would be similar to my critique of the market, there exists around the analysis a kind of vacuum, a failure of understanding as to what is value, what are desirable outcomes, what are the effects on the psyche. I see in your analysis, the hand of Evil, the cunning mind at work, the calculator the strategist, the future oriented goal seeker. Because man does not know for what he seeks he has the fantasy it lies in victory. I think the real victory lies in defeat, the death of the ego. When that happens war, violence and hate disappear and the real man, the real victor, the undefeatable one emerges. From that vantage I think the analysis you quoted is revealed as nothing more than what I have alluded to before, a sophisticated form of self justification based on the need to avoid feelings of guilt. War is a limitation of vision, a form of mental illness.

and it is also a reality. if we hadn't fought a war you would be either wearing a nazi arm band or dead already for your views.

That was almost sixty years ago... and if the south would have won, black people would still be slaves in the US... your point is? were you in that war? were you even born?

What does that have to do with what is happening in Israel today? NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING...

To this thread, your comment is of NO value... at all... not more than one that states that whenever a black man does something, we should think about the civil war... If the Jewish state of Israel does something wrong, people condemn them, and it has NOTHING to do with anti-semitism...

This comment is stupid, irrelevant and at best... just an attempt to irritate...

 

[Nefrodite]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Very interesting post, Stark. Fascinating to see war analyzed with cold reason and an eye to pragmatic outcome. Very Machiavellian. The problem I have with it would be similar to my critique of the market, there exists around the analysis a kind of vacuum, a failure of understanding as to what is value, what are desirable outcomes, what are the effects on the psyche. I see in your analysis, the hand of Evil, the cunning mind at work, the calculator the strategist, the future oriented goal seeker. Because man does not know for what he seeks he has the fantasy it lies in victory. I think the real victory lies in defeat, the death of the ego. When that happens war, violence and hate disappear and the real man, the real victor, the undefeatable one emerges. From that vantage I think the analysis you quoted is revealed as nothing more than what I have alluded to before, a sophisticated form of self justification based on the need to avoid feelings of guilt. War is a limitation of vision, a form of mental illness.

and it is also a reality. if we hadn't fought a war you would be either wearing a nazi arm band or dead already for your views.

That was almost sixty years ago... and if the south would have won, black people would still be slaves in the US... your point is? were you in that war? were you even born?

What does that have to do with what is happening in Israel today? NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING...

To this thread, your comment is of NO value... at all... not more than one that states that whenever a black man does something, we should think about the civil war... If the Jewish state of Israel does something wrong, people condemn them, and it has NOTHING to do with anti-semitism...

This comment is stupid, irrelevant and at best... just an attempt to irritate...

perhaps your comments have no value at all because they have no basis in reality.

 

[Moonbeam]

This comment is stupid, irrelevant and at best... just an attempt to irritate...
-------------------------------------------------------

I was almost tempted to apply that to the LSD statement, but I'm rather used to that sort of comment. It's covered in my sig, the far out part.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
This comment is stupid, irrelevant and at best... just an attempt to irritate...
-------------------------------------------------------

I was almost tempted to apply that to the LSD statement, but I'm rather used to that sort of comment. It's covered in my sig, the far out part.

I understood what you meant... and i forgot to put a smiley at the end, i am not some little kid... and i am truly sorry if it offended you...

 

[alphatarget1]

Originally posted by: Lucky
Does anyone think that you could "reasonably" apply some of the same the logic that the US used in using the atomic bomb during WWII to the palestinians using suicide bombs against the israelis? More specifically, since military service in mandatory for israeli males (females?) would discriminate bombing of large groups of israeli males be considered OK since they are, were, or would be part of the IDF force?

please take careful note of the specific aspect of my question if you choose to respond.

dropping an atomic bomb on nagasaki and hiroshima was more of a political/military move against USSR than against Japan

 

[crystal]

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
I wouldn't bomb civilians, it doesn't matter who was hiding with them I wouldn't do it because that would make me a terrorist and I'm better than that. If people justify the killing of innocent civilians then where do you draw the line? Is 30 dead civilians ok? How about 3000?

so you wouldn't bomb a man planning the next WTC if you had confirmation. sometimes its a dark choice to make, but guess who forced you to make it?

If innocent civilians had to die then no I wouldn't drop a bomb on them, I would find other means which IMO is what most people would do because it would be the RIGHT thing to do.

Looking back at your history, US have to drop two a-bombs to stop WWII. A lot of Japanese civilians died in both cases.
Let me ask you this question, do you think any terrorist groups would survive/are effective for long without local population support? If the local population supported these terroriest groups, whether openly or covertly, are they truely innocent?

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Very interesting post, Stark. Fascinating to see war analyzed with cold reason and an eye to pragmatic outcome. Very Machiavellian. The problem I have with it would be similar to my critique of the market, there exists around the analysis a kind of vacuum, a failure of understanding as to what is value, what are desirable outcomes, what are the effects on the psyche. I see in your analysis, the hand of Evil, the cunning mind at work, the calculator the strategist, the future oriented goal seeker. Because man does not know for what he seeks he has the fantasy it lies in victory. I think the real victory lies in defeat, the death of the ego. When that happens war, violence and hate disappear and the real man, the real victor, the undefeatable one emerges. From that vantage I think the analysis you quoted is revealed as nothing more than what I have alluded to before, a sophisticated form of self justification based on the need to avoid feelings of guilt. War is a limitation of vision, a form of mental illness.

and it is also a reality. if we hadn't fought a war you would be either wearing a nazi arm band or dead already for your views.

That was almost sixty years ago... and if the south would have won, black people would still be slaves in the US... your point is? were you in that war? were you even born?

What does that have to do with what is happening in Israel today? NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING...

To this thread, your comment is of NO value... at all... not more than one that states that whenever a black man does something, we should think about the civil war... If the Jewish state of Israel does something wrong, people condemn them, and it has NOTHING to do with anti-semitism...

This comment is stupid, irrelevant and at best... just an attempt to irritate...

perhaps your comments have no value at all because they have no basis in reality.

So if i cannot accept that a sixty year old war, that has been over and done with for sixty years has no relevance to the action of the arabs, my opinions have no basis in reality?

I will stop arguing with you, you mix the palestinians bombings with the holocaust, the retaliation with the bombing of hiroshima and nagasaki, a hamas leader with hitler...

THE WWII HAS ENDED.. get it? IT WAS SIXTY YEARS AGO... MAY IT NEVER EVER BE FORGOTTEN, BUT IT HAS NOTHING, NADA, ZILCH TO DO WITH THIS WAR!

Just understand this, this isn't a new persecution of Jews, i am sure if catholics live in the same settlemets they will not be spared... get it? do you understand it? this is NOT the holocaust all over again.....

 

[Moonbeam]

Nefrodite, I love it when people argue with me but make up the argument themselves. It happens constantly. I would be wearing an Nazi arm band or dead. Jeez. How the hell do you know? But anyway I'm not the issue. Your point is that war is a reality. My point is that it is an illusion that masquerades as a reality. Your belief system adds to that fixation, mine removes it. Your way is the dead end you see in the world, mine is the door out, the only door out. All the death and suffering of war stems from the fact that humanity is asleep, living in a dream. There is nothing you can do. There is no such thing a safety. The answer is to awaken. But go ahead and rant and rave. It won't, however, change that fact.

 

[Balthazar]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve
me wonders what it is with all of these low use accounts registered in September 2000 popping up lately only to Post anti-semitic stuff.

Interesting huh.

What I want to know is, why is it all Isreal, why don't these people realize BOTH sides have some serious issues.

I tend to lean a little more towards the Isreali side of things, but they both suck.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: crystal

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
I wouldn't bomb civilians, it doesn't matter who was hiding with them I wouldn't do it because that would make me a terrorist and I'm better than that. If people justify the killing of innocent civilians then where do you draw the line? Is 30 dead civilians ok? How about 3000?

so you wouldn't bomb a man planning the next WTC if you had confirmation. sometimes its a dark choice to make, but guess who forced you to make it?

If innocent civilians had to die then no I wouldn't drop a bomb on them, I would find other means which IMO is what most people would do because it would be the RIGHT thing to do.

Looking back at your history, US have to drop two a-bombs to stop WWII. A lot of Japanese civilians died in both cases.
Let me ask you this question, do you think any terrorist groups would survive/are effective for long without local population support? If the local population supported these terroriest groups, whether openly or covertly, are they truely innocent?

ehhh... both sides are bombing civilians, so that would go in both directions, right... if the palestinians dropped a 1+ton bomb in a civilian area where Sharon slept, you wouldn't mind? It has to do with perception, the simplest of the physichological structure actually... perception, you percieve someone as a threat you attack, sometimes it is the best defense, a thought through attack that kills civilians shows a sick, SICK mind... and you can say what you want about that... could YOU kill innocent people because innocent people of your country were killed?

Who is innocent, do you support the killing of civilian innocent palestinans? does that make you innocent? where do you draw the line? i will tell you where but you will NOT like it, the line is drawn where the civilians are...

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Nefrodite, I love it when people argue with me but make up the argument themselves. It happens constantly. I would be wearing an Nazi arm band or dead. Jeez. How the hell do you know? But anyway I'm not the issue. Your point is that war is a reality. My point is that it is an illusion that masquerades as a reality. Your belief system adds to that fixation, mine removes it. Your way is the dead end you see in the world, mine is the door out, the only door out. All the death and suffering of war stems from the fact that humanity is asleep, living in a dream. There is nothing you can do. There is no such thing a safety. The answer is to awaken. But go ahead and rant and rave. It won't, however, change that fact.

What does this mean... "to awaken"? to awaken to what? you do not explain clearly enough, not to me at least... i am somewhat interested in what you have to say... but you say that humanity is asleep, living in a dream, nothing to be done... this is simply not the truth... may it be your truth if you want it... but humanity, as a species is always awake, always watching, always interpreting...

Your belief system does not work... it changes nothing, nothing but the way you percieve thruth... that is hopelessness... and i am not there yet... maybe slowly i am getting there, but not yet...

 

[Moonbeam]

No offence taken, Snap It. I didn't forget my smiley. I get the drug remarks on such a regular basis that I added that clause to my sig in the hopes of warding some of it off. On serious issues I sometimes don't let people squirm away with the 'what is he smoking shine on'. Long experience has taught me that when you get down to the nitty gritty people suddenly remember they forgot Aunt Martha's birthday card, anything at all but look within. I remember very well what I had to pay for just my small piece of understanding. I understand all about reluctance and the hope to avoid pain. What little I've seen is because I just couldn't get away.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Balthazar

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteve
me wonders what it is with all of these low use accounts registered in September 2000 popping up lately only to Post anti-semitic stuff.

Interesting huh.

What I want to know is, why is it all Isreal, why don't these people realize BOTH sides have some serious issues.

I tend to lean a little more towards the Isreali side of things, but they both suck.

May i ask you this one question, please? where the fsck did you read that in this thread? That the only ones who suck is Israelis... it hasn't been stated anywhere!

On the contrary, it has been stated many times that the Palestinians are the only ones at fault, not the Israelis!

Next time, read the fscking thread before answering!

 

[Nefrodite]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Very interesting post, Stark. Fascinating to see war analyzed with cold reason and an eye to pragmatic outcome. Very Machiavellian. The problem I have with it would be similar to my critique of the market, there exists around the analysis a kind of vacuum, a failure of understanding as to what is value, what are desirable outcomes, what are the effects on the psyche. I see in your analysis, the hand of Evil, the cunning mind at work, the calculator the strategist, the future oriented goal seeker. Because man does not know for what he seeks he has the fantasy it lies in victory. I think the real victory lies in defeat, the death of the ego. When that happens war, violence and hate disappear and the real man, the real victor, the undefeatable one emerges. From that vantage I think the analysis you quoted is revealed as nothing more than what I have alluded to before, a sophisticated form of self justification based on the need to avoid feelings of guilt. War is a limitation of vision, a form of mental illness.

and it is also a reality. if we hadn't fought a war you would be either wearing a nazi arm band or dead already for your views.

That was almost sixty years ago... and if the south would have won, black people would still be slaves in the US... your point is? were you in that war? were you even born?

What does that have to do with what is happening in Israel today? NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING...

To this thread, your comment is of NO value... at all... not more than one that states that whenever a black man does something, we should think about the civil war... If the Jewish state of Israel does something wrong, people condemn them, and it has NOTHING to do with anti-semitism...

This comment is stupid, irrelevant and at best... just an attempt to irritate...

perhaps your comments have no value at all because they have no basis in reality.

So if i cannot accept that a sixty year old war, that has been over and done with for sixty years has no relevance to the action of the arabs, my opinions have no basis in reality?

I will stop arguing with you, you mix the palestinians bombings with the holocaust, the retaliation with the bombing of hiroshima and nagasaki, a hamas leader with hitler...

THE WWII HAS ENDED.. get it? IT WAS SIXTY YEARS AGO... MAY IT NEVER EVER BE FORGOTTEN, BUT IT HAS NOTHING, NADA, ZILCH TO DO WITH THIS WAR!

Just understand this, this isn't a new persecution of Jews, i am sure if catholics live in the same settlemets they will not be spared... get it? do you understand it? this is NOT the holocaust all over again.....

you will stop argueing with me because all your arguements result in absurdity when taken to their logical conclusion. in your moral relativism we're all the same, we're all terrorists. even wars of defense are terrorist actions. you live in some morally relative universe where criminals are criminals only because police officers exist. and well, the police officers themselves are criminals too.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
No offence taken, Snap It. I didn't forget my smiley. I get the drug remarks on such a regular basis that I added that clause to my sig in the hopes of warding some of it off. On serious issues I sometimes don't let people squirm away with the 'what is he smoking shine on'. Long experience has taught me that when you get down to the nitty gritty people suddenly remember they forgot Aunt Martha's birthday card, anything at all but look within. I remember very well what I had to pay for just my small piece of understanding. I understand all about reluctance and the hope to avoid pain. What little I've seen is because I just couldn't get away.

Actually, you could try not to beat around the bush as much as you do at times, i understand that it is to explain why you have your viewpoint... but even so... sometimes, just proclaim it, if someone wants to know why they will ask... just a tip...

I do not doubt your intelligence... not one bit, not your perception either... not one bit... perception and intelligence... the ultimate predator...

 

[rendicil]

Originally posted by: SnapIT


Another poster who hasn't read the thread at all... and obviously knows very little about the bombing...

NOBODY here disputes that Palestinian terrorists have killed children, NOBODY here says anything else than that it is horrible... BUT, it is just as horrible when the Israelis do the same thing...

And if you knew anything about the actual bombing, you would know that the people injured weren't just his family and that the bombing of civilians alongside with the Hamasleader was intentional...

You totally misunderstood my point. I lived in Israel for a while and I know plenty about the bombings... A couple of my friends were actually killed.... anyway... I was trying to say that Sharon is trying to prove a point to the palestinian terrorists that you can't just hide behind your family because we will not hesitate to make the israeli people safe. There are always people minding there own business (young and old) who are caught in the crossfire between the two nations (hell it happens here in the US too... look at gang wars in LA). And one of the most promising facts is that Palestinian people are starting to not harbor terrorists anymore for fear of what might now happen to there families. Any idiot terrorist out there who loves his/her family wouldn't hide behind them and would take what's coming to them. I mean they want to blow themselves up anyway... why take their families along with them?

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Very interesting post, Stark. Fascinating to see war analyzed with cold reason and an eye to pragmatic outcome. Very Machiavellian. The problem I have with it would be similar to my critique of the market, there exists around the analysis a kind of vacuum, a failure of understanding as to what is value, what are desirable outcomes, what are the effects on the psyche. I see in your analysis, the hand of Evil, the cunning mind at work, the calculator the strategist, the future oriented goal seeker. Because man does not know for what he seeks he has the fantasy it lies in victory. I think the real victory lies in defeat, the death of the ego. When that happens war, violence and hate disappear and the real man, the real victor, the undefeatable one emerges. From that vantage I think the analysis you quoted is revealed as nothing more than what I have alluded to before, a sophisticated form of self justification based on the need to avoid feelings of guilt. War is a limitation of vision, a form of mental illness.

and it is also a reality. if we hadn't fought a war you would be either wearing a nazi arm band or dead already for your views.

That was almost sixty years ago... and if the south would have won, black people would still be slaves in the US... your point is? were you in that war? were you even born?

What does that have to do with what is happening in Israel today? NADA, ZILCH, NOTHING...

To this thread, your comment is of NO value... at all... not more than one that states that whenever a black man does something, we should think about the civil war... If the Jewish state of Israel does something wrong, people condemn them, and it has NOTHING to do with anti-semitism...

This comment is stupid, irrelevant and at best... just an attempt to irritate...

perhaps your comments have no value at all because they have no basis in reality.

So if i cannot accept that a sixty year old war, that has been over and done with for sixty years has no relevance to the action of the arabs, my opinions have no basis in reality?

I will stop arguing with you, you mix the palestinians bombings with the holocaust, the retaliation with the bombing of hiroshima and nagasaki, a hamas leader with hitler...

THE WWII HAS ENDED.. get it? IT WAS SIXTY YEARS AGO... MAY IT NEVER EVER BE FORGOTTEN, BUT IT HAS NOTHING, NADA, ZILCH TO DO WITH THIS WAR!

Just understand this, this isn't a new persecution of Jews, i am sure if catholics live in the same settlemets they will not be spared... get it? do you understand it? this is NOT the holocaust all over again.....

you will stop argueing with me because all your arguements result in absurdity when taken to their logical conclusion. in your moral relativism we're all the same, we're all terrorists. even wars of defense are terrorist actions. you live in some morally relative universe where criminals are criminals only because police officers exist. and well, the police officers themselves are criminals too.

No, actually i will stop arguing because you do not see arabs and jews equal... you are a racist.. down to the bonemarrow.. i cannot change that so i will stop... The proof of that you just stated... everone can be a terrorist, white, arab, jew or whatever, you cannot accept the simple fact that if you bomb civilians intentionally you are a terrorist, i can... and i would be what the germans once called a true arier...

 

[crystal]

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: crystal

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
I wouldn't bomb civilians, it doesn't matter who was hiding with them I wouldn't do it because that would make me a terrorist and I'm better than that. If people justify the killing of innocent civilians then where do you draw the line? Is 30 dead civilians ok? How about 3000?

so you wouldn't bomb a man planning the next WTC if you had confirmation. sometimes its a dark choice to make, but guess who forced you to make it?

If innocent civilians had to die then no I wouldn't drop a bomb on them, I would find other means which IMO is what most people would do because it would be the RIGHT thing to do.

Looking back at your history, US have to drop two a-bombs to stop WWII. A lot of Japanese civilians died in both cases.
Let me ask you this question, do you think any terrorist groups would survive/are effective for long without local population support? If the local population supported these terroriest groups, whether openly or covertly, are they truely innocent?

ehhh... both sides are bombing civilians, so that would go in both directions, right... if the palestinians dropped a 1+ton bomb in a civilian area where Sharon slept, you wouldn't mind? It has to do with perception, the simplest of the physichological structure actually... perception, you percieve someone as a threat you attack, sometimes it is the best defense, a thought through attack that kills civilians shows a sick, SICK mind... and you can say what you want about that... could YOU kill innocent people because innocent people of your country were killed?

Who is innocent, do you support the killing of civilian innocent palestinans? does that make you innocent? where do you draw the line? i will tell you where but you will NOT like it, the line is drawn where the civilians are...

But don't you see, no one is truely "innoncent" in these cases. The cycle of violent will continued until the population that support these activies set down their foot and say no. Until that time, they are non-combatant that provide support to their combatant counterparts.

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: rendicil

Originally posted by: SnapIT


Another poster who hasn't read the thread at all... and obviously knows very little about the bombing...

NOBODY here disputes that Palestinian terrorists have killed children, NOBODY here says anything else than that it is horrible... BUT, it is just as horrible when the Israelis do the same thing...

And if you knew anything about the actual bombing, you would know that the people injured weren't just his family and that the bombing of civilians alongside with the Hamasleader was intentional...

You totally misunderstood my point. I lived in Israel for a while and I know plenty about the bombings... A couple of my friends were actually killed.... anyway... I was trying to say that Sharon is trying to prove a point to the palestinian terrorists that you can't just hide behind your family because we will not hesitate to make the israeli people safe. There are always people minding there own business (young and old) who are caught in the crossfire between the two nations (hell it happens here in the US too... look at gang wars in LA). And one of the most promising facts is that Palestinian people are starting to not harbor terrorists anymore for fear of what might now happen to there families. Any idiot terrorist out there who loves his/her family wouldn't hide behind them and would take what's coming to them. I mean they want to blow themselves up anyway... why take their families along with them?

And the palestinians are just blowing up a few civilians... so what? the palestinians were trying to prove a point, that you cannot hide behind your people (actually, not only the hamas family died in that bombing, a lot of others did too) because we will not hesitate to make the Palestinians safe. There are always people minding their own business (young and old) who are caught in the crossfier between the two nations (hell it happens her in Sweden too... look at the shadow wars in Stockholm). And one of the least promising facts is that the Israelis will not take one step back, instead they will continue their terrorism. Any idiot Israeli soldier out there who loves his/her family wouldn't hide behind them (i am sure nobody beyond the grade of sargant actually spends time with his family in the israely army) and if they should then they would take what's coming to them. i mean if they want to get praised in battle anyways, so why keep the families where they aren't safe?

 

[SnapIT]

Originally posted by: crystal

Originally posted by: SnapIT

Originally posted by: crystal

Originally posted by: nemesismk2

Originally posted by: Nefrodite

Originally posted by: nemesismk2
I wouldn't bomb civilians, it doesn't matter who was hiding with them I wouldn't do it because that would make me a terrorist and I'm better than that. If people justify the killing of innocent civilians then where do you draw the line? Is 30 dead civilians ok? How about 3000?

so you wouldn't bomb a man planning the next WTC if you had confirmation. sometimes its a dark choice to make, but guess who forced you to make it?

If innocent civilians had to die then no I wouldn't drop a bomb on them, I would find other means which IMO is what most people would do because it would be the RIGHT thing to do.

Looking back at your history, US have to drop two a-bombs to stop WWII. A lot of Japanese civilians died in both cases.
Let me ask you this question, do you think any terrorist groups would survive/are effective for long without local population support? If the local population supported these terroriest groups, whether openly or covertly, are they truely innocent?

ehhh... both sides are bombing civilians, so that would go in both directions, right... if the palestinians dropped a 1+ton bomb in a civilian area where Sharon slept, you wouldn't mind? It has to do with perception, the simplest of the physichological structure actually... perception, you percieve someone as a threat you attack, sometimes it is the best defense, a thought through attack that kills civilians shows a sick, SICK mind... and you can say what you want about that... could YOU kill innocent people because innocent people of your country were killed?

Who is innocent, do you support the killing of civilian innocent palestinans? does that make you innocent? where do you draw the line? i will tell you where but you will NOT like it, the line is drawn where the civilians are...

But don't you see, no one is truely "innoncent" in these cases. The cycle of violent will continued until the population that support these activies set down their foot and say no. Until that time, they are non-combatant that provide support to their combatant counterparts.

Well... i said so about fifty posts ago...