Election in Spain

DATYdude

Puttin' in Face Time
Oct 8, 2003
3,762
0
36
I find it amazing that Muslims kill 200 commuters in Madrid and the discussion about that act devolves into blaming colonialism, Israel, and Jews for it. I mean, wake up!

Scouser:

Fascism:
Definition: [n] a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government (as opposed to democracy or liberalism)

Please explain how Zionism is fascism. Don't bandy about words like racism and fascism when you don't know what you're talking about.

Racism is a bit harder to nail down. The UN, led by the despotic governments of the Arab world, trumpeted how Zionism is racism for many years. In a way, creating a state for Jews to the exclusion of others (not that there aren't Muslims, Christians, Bahai etc. in Israel) does privilege Jews over non-Jews. I'm a Jew, and if I want to to I can immigrate to Israel with none of the barriers that non-Jews might face. I agree that's racism, and it's a trade-off made for the sake of having the Jewish state remain Jewish.

Zionism is the political movement whose adherents believe that Jews need a nation-state of their own in order to be safe and full members of the community of nations. Every other ethnic nation is said to have the right to a state, and although Sikhs, Tibetans, Kurds, and many others are still without states, most would agree that if you see yourselves as a distinct, you should have a state of your own.

The world seems to believe in nationalism. Do Jews not count, do Jews not need or deserve a state?

I have no argument that many Arabs suffered because of the events surrounding the creation of a Jewish state in historical Israel. But that isn't the whole story. Do the Arabs have no responsibility for the current state of affairs? Is it proper to blow up Spanish commuters or even commuters in Jerusalem as a response?

Apart from all of the history which is hotly disputed, the plain fact is Israel exists, and Jews (the actual people who are the inheritors of the "great and noble religion" you profess to like so much) want it to survive. You write about Judaism like it's a museum display.
 

ocean976124

Arrogant American Idiot
Oct 28, 2002
1,291
0
36
USA
Drunken Master said:
Remember Vietnam? My Lai? "We had to destroy that village in order to save it." How about Kissinger's bombing campaign in Cambodia?

I don't mean to put the US on par with the terrorists, but let's not be naive.
Vietnam was a mess all it own. It violated almost every military principle the US armed forces lived by. But I was speaking about US military policy in the current world...
 

ocean976124

Arrogant American Idiot
Oct 28, 2002
1,291
0
36
USA
Drunken Master said:
Wow. Sounds like you have intimate knowledge of future military planning. Do you work at the Pentagon? Can you get Sheik a 50,000 dollar mechanical pencil?

Can't you hear all the Iraqi cheering? "Hooray! we get to be where the Americans will be putting all their Middle East military bases! Hooray for the Infidel and his Military Might!"

Smart.

As for the Saudis, I suggest you head on over to this link:

http://www.guerrillanews.com/intelligence/doc4097.html

The US under Bush is hardly waiting for the right time to "deal with the Saudis." The Bush family and the Saudis have been arm-in-arm for decades.
Bush is also under increasingly more political pressure to get tougher with the Saudis. But Bush certainly isn't about to do that when we're still heavily involved in securing Iraq.
Yes the Iraqi population considers us an occupying force, but polls also show more than half do not want us to leave yet...
 

ocean976124

Arrogant American Idiot
Oct 28, 2002
1,291
0
36
USA
scouser1 said:
Israel's entire existence is a fabrication and unatural, this was a country born of the guilt of the Europeans, on the blood and land of Arab speaking Muslims and Christians,
A little more complex than that. Prior to 1948 the "holy land" had not really been an independent nation. It was under Roman Empire and then under the Muslim empire and Turkish Empire and then under the Bristish Empire. The Palestinians didn't become an actual nationality until it was convenient to do so to make the 1948 founding of Israel look bad.
and when you have to quote Arab leaders who are nothing short of murderers and despots, well thats a problem that doesnt help your argument, my problem isnt with Judaism a great and noble religion but with the racist and fascist ideology of Zionism which started this whole mess in the Middle East.
Much like a liberal, you ignore the context of the statement I made. Someone had accused me of simply labeling those who criticise Israel as anti-Semetic. I then pointed out that I had only been speaking about the Arab political and religious leaders who are most certainly anti-semetic (as you have just agreed).
 

gryfin

New member
Aug 30, 2001
9,632
0
0
Hey ocean976124, this is a coincidence

There was no such nationality as Israeli until 1948 as well. Do you consider that "convenient" also? Or do you differentiate worth? For me, they are both valid. Where do you stand?
 

DATYdude

Puttin' in Face Time
Oct 8, 2003
3,762
0
36
gryf - I see your point but you don't have exact parallels. There were no Israelis before 1948, but you have a distinct nationality tied to a shard culture going back for many centuries. The moniker Israeli is tied to the creation of the modern state of Israel.

For Palestinians, you have groups of Arabs whose ties to specific familial groupings and towns formed their self-identities before the 1960s, but there was no unifying Palestinian identity until there was a national movement for a state among Palestinians (the PLO was founded in 1964 I think).

Clearly all that matters when it comes to nationalism is that a group deveops a national self-identity, and once it does, it's real enough to deserve respect. Palestinians are a nation and their aspirations to a state should be respected.
 

DATYdude

Puttin' in Face Time
Oct 8, 2003
3,762
0
36
Anyway this thred was supposed to be about the Spanish elections and the Madrid bombings. I hear that Spanish authorities have arrested a couple of Moroccans and an Algerian.

Seems like no group is being too outspoken about claiming responsibility for this attack. Wonder if Osama has a film crew ready...
 

Ickabod

New member
Oct 13, 2001
327
0
0
59
Heather Elite
ocean976124 said:
The US does not target innocent civilians.
No, but when you do something knowing full well that innocent civilians will be killed, it's tough to distinguish a real difference. And i don't say that to be a bleeding heart. If war is necessary, one of the unfortunate results is that innocent people will be killed. I absolutely accept that reality as an unfortunate necessity. But, if 5000, or 10,000 innocent foreign civilians are killed to prevent a threat of a very remote possibility of 5000 innocent Americans being killed, then 1)i'm damn glad i'm on the American side.....but 2)...and this is where you chest thumping conservatives just don't get it....i fully understand why the other side may not take too kindly to their being killed. But no, you conservatives think that if they fight back in any way, even if it's fighting back dirty through the use of terrorism, you all think it's because they hate our freedoms. Please.

And number two, if those Middle Eastern nation had our firepower what do you think they would be doing with it?
Well, if they had our firepower and we had their's, they'd probably bomb our military targets to smithereens, kill thousands of civilians in the process, and claim they weren't targeting civilians. And we'd, in turn, hate them for their freedoms.
 

xix

Time Zone Traveller
Jul 27, 2002
4,167
1,403
113
La la land
Re: A little background....

WoodPeckr said:
One big difference with Osama as opposed to those others, is that Osama was "created, trained and helped" by the BEST, the good ole USA. Bush's daddy, Cheney and Rumsfeld had a big hand in creating Bin Laden back in the 80's when they were fighting the old USSR in Afghanistan. Back then Osama was OUR freedom fighter and he gave the USSR, with USA backing, hell. USA promised Osama help in rebuilding Afghanistan once the USSR was expelled, which NEVER happened. Osama felt betrayed (surprise surprise) and stabbed in the back by the US, causing him to be a bit bitter towards the USA to this day.
The americans have being praticising this policy since 1950, I am estimating. Heck it's the Marshall plan that left a lot of countries poor.
 

xix

Time Zone Traveller
Jul 27, 2002
4,167
1,403
113
La la land
KBear said:
Never really worried about terrorism, but think that things just got a lot more dangerous with the election in Spain being influenced by a terrorist attack. Spain has announced they will now be pulling out of Iraq. What a stunning success for the terrorists.
Well yes it is a success. But everyone knows if you are going to back the up the bully expect to be hated also. The question is now how many countries are going to back out. Everyone know the US are hated world wide. I think this attack will affect Bush re-election.
 

Bababooie

New member
Jun 1, 2002
21
0
0
The simple answer

Is, the Arabs will always "hate" the Jews" They will not be happy until the Jew's are wiped from the face of the earth. It is bread into the Arabs from the day they are born. There will never be peace in the middle east as long as the Jews are there. Simple as that.

The US supports and protects Israel, as well they should, that's why the radical Muslims hate the US. It's amazing how much hate religion can breed. A lot of people on this noard seem to hate the US as well. All I can say is I know the first nation that always gets called to protect freedom, and it ain't Canada.
 

Quest4Less

Well-known member
May 25, 2002
1,063
27
48
Lets drop neutrons on the entire middle east.... in a few months the radiation fades, and all the great nations can split up the turf... America, Russia, UK, France, & China. No more fighting, and plenty of oil for all....
 

ocean976124

Arrogant American Idiot
Oct 28, 2002
1,291
0
36
USA
Re: Hey ocean976124, this is a coincidence

gryfin said:
There was no such nationality as Israeli until 1948 as well. Do you consider that "convenient" also? Or do you differentiate worth? For me, they are both valid. Where do you stand?
Once again, a typical liberal lack of context. Everyone speaks of the Palestinians as if they are some ancient ethnic or social entity and they are not. Palestine has never existed as an autonomous entity. There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs from all over the Middle East who just happened to be living in the British controlled area (that was previous ruled by a spreading Muslim empire, Christian crusaders, and a Turkish empire) that the UN gave to the Jewish people.
This piece of land has only existed a separate national entity in history when it was controled by the Jewish people. At all other times it was simply a small part of a larger empire.
The irony is that the Palestinians would have had their own nation given them by the UN in 1948 as well but they didn't want it, they instead thought it was better to drive the Jews from the region....
 

ocean976124

Arrogant American Idiot
Oct 28, 2002
1,291
0
36
USA
Ickabod said:
No, but when you do something knowing full well that innocent civilians will be killed, it's tough to distinguish a real difference. And i don't say that to be a bleeding heart. If war is necessary, one of the unfortunate results is that innocent people will be killed. I absolutely accept that reality as an unfortunate necessity. But, if 5000, or 10,000 innocent foreign civilians are killed to prevent a threat of a very remote possibility of 5000 innocent Americans being killed, then 1)i'm damn glad i'm on the American side.....but 2)...and this is where you chest thumping conservatives just don't get it....i fully understand why the other side may not take too kindly to their being killed. But no, you conservatives think that if they fight back in any way, even if it's fighting back dirty through the use of terrorism, you all think it's because they hate our freedoms. Please.
This is laughable. There is a huge difference between directly targeting civillians and what is unfortunately the side result of a bomb. Let me see, your nation kills people from my nation so I drop a bomb on your military that unfortunately kills civilians nearby so I'm at fault? I guess we should have just given Hitler all of Europe then...
BTW, there is no chest thumping but I do get angry when someone takes the side of anti-semetic terrorists over two nations that are trying to defend themselves... Maybe not every the USA and Israel does is the best way to go about things, but lets not lose sight of the real enemy here. Do you really think these groups will be satisfied if they actually destroy Israel and make the USA retreat? Do you really think they wouldn't find other targets for their hatred?
Well, if they had our firepower and we had their's, they'd probably bomb our military targets to smithereens, kill thousands of civilians in the process, and claim they weren't targeting civilians. And we'd, in turn, hate them for their freedoms.
LOL, they'd have nuked all of Israel and the USA. They have no military ethics and they don't distinguish between military and civilian when it comes to infidels and Jews.
 

ocean976124

Arrogant American Idiot
Oct 28, 2002
1,291
0
36
USA
Quest4Less said:
Lets drop neutrons on the entire middle east.... in a few months the radiation fades, and all the great nations can split up the turf... America, Russia, UK, France, & China. No more fighting, and plenty of oil for all....
Actually if we threw out all our ethics I'm sure the USA could work out a deal with a secular tyrannt in that region. Give him all the oil and money but make the one condition he has to leave Israel alone.
 

Saturn_Alien

Banned
Mar 13, 2004
27
0
0
The USA is goint to hit a brick wall, Spain already said it will join "the french side of the conflict", that means join the peace side. The entire 3rd world is against the USA (and for good reason). Saudi Arabia and Jordan, long-time puppets of the USA are already officially anti-american.

Americans have put a noose around their own necks, that's what any bully gets when other smaller kids have had enough.

I hope Americans smarten up and vote for Kerry, The Spanish sure smarten up, democracy has to win.
 

*d*

Active member
Aug 17, 2001
1,621
12
38
ocean976124 said:
The US does not target innocent civilians.
The US has targeted civilian areas with no military objectives in the following countries:
Japan (1945)
China (1945–46)
Korea & China (1950–53)
Guatemala (1954, 1960, 1967–69)
Indonesia (1958)
Cuba (1959–61)
Congo (1964)
Peru (1965)
Laos (1964–70)
Vietnam (1961–1973)
Cambodia (1969–70)
Grenada (1983)
Lebanon (1983–84)
Libya (1986)
El Salvador (1980s)
Nicaragua (1980s)
Iran (1987)
Panama (1989)
Iraq (1991–2000)
Kuwait (1991)
Somalia (1993)
Bosnia (1994–95)
Sudan (1998)
Afghanistan (1998)
Pakistan (1998)
Yugoslavia (1999)
Macedonia (1999)
 

Saturn_Alien

Banned
Mar 13, 2004
27
0
0
You forgot Rhodesia, Guatemala and Ecuador. The CIA murdered the Ecuador prez and helped the guatemalan army kill thousands of peasant in the 1980's.
 
Ashley Madison
Toronto Escorts