You could move into one of those Gaza tunnels smuggling illegal weapons, no? Oops, what tunnels, right?gryfin said:
Gyaos Baltar.
Move the Jews from the middile east
- Thread starter Earl1
- Start date
Gyaos Baltar.
Those tunnels are almost all rebuilt, read the Star today. You have to find another home for grffy jr.Gyaos said:
The white coats came to take Earl away, that guy was loopy. If you have to question why he was banned and you've read all his posts, what does say about you?
Have you read anything on the subject? In 1918, at the time of the Balfour declaration the Jewish population only made up 7.585% of the population and just before it was declared a Jewish state in 1948 (so in 1946), only 32.956% of the population was Jewish. So I am completely correct in saying what I did and you are the one who is in fact wrong.The Houdini said:
http://israelipalestinian.procon.org/viewresource.asp?resourceID=636#graph3
Re: Earl
I totally disagree with what Earl1 said about the extermination of the Jews.
I'm not sure though how his viewpoint is that much different than many of the extreme pro-Israeli viewpoints on this board which basically are along the lines that it is okay to kill as many Arabs as needed in order to defend the Israeli state against all threats no matter how minor. The mentality is the same, and so is the end game. According to that philosophy, one can excuse Israel in bombing and obliterating every Palestinian in the Gaza strip by claiming self-defense.
So my question is, shouldn't the censorship/banning be more objective and across the board?
I totally disagree with what Earl1 said about the extermination of the Jews.
I'm not sure though how his viewpoint is that much different than many of the extreme pro-Israeli viewpoints on this board which basically are along the lines that it is okay to kill as many Arabs as needed in order to defend the Israeli state against all threats no matter how minor. The mentality is the same, and so is the end game. According to that philosophy, one can excuse Israel in bombing and obliterating every Palestinian in the Gaza strip by claiming self-defense.
So my question is, shouldn't the censorship/banning be more objective and across the board?
Do you think you can win debates by misrepresenting the position of the other side? In the end you merely show yourself to be a fraud.solitaria said:
IDF is entitled to use the minimum force necessary to defend Israel from attack. I can't fathom how that would translate into "obliterating every Palestinian in the Gaza strip" as plainly it's possible to go after Hamas and the rocket launchers with far less force than that.
The most recent conflict only claimed a few hundred civilian lives, but you have exagerrated that into "obliterating every Palestinian in the Gaza strip".
You are a fraud.
solitaria said:
I'm sorry Solitaria but there is a distinct differance between a group who intentionally fires rockets in to civilain populations in an attempt to cause terror and casulties, then a military who fires even more powerful weapons into a populated area in which an enemy is firing from when that area contains the civilian population of your enemy. The Israely military wasn't hiding within their civilian population and firing at HAMAS from their... HAMAS was doing both and therefore it is HAMAS that should be held accountable for the civilian deaths in GAZA.
You are missing the obvious conclusion to your philosophy. It is impossible to destroy every threat of attack to Israel from the other side unless the other side is completely obliterated. It is impossible to stop even more people from wanting to attack Israel, if Israel constantly kills way more people than it defends.fuji said:
Perhaps you are unaware of how the Germans and the British used terrorism against each other in WW11 and how Israel used terrorism to become a state?jackd1959 said:
The only time an army doesn't resort to terrorism is when they have absolute military superiority as is the case with Israel right now over Hamas. Even still, it largely depends on how you define the word "terrorism" because war is terror for any civilian population even if they aren't the primary targets but end up being killed on a large scale anyway. In the end does it really matter if the massive civilians casualties were the result of being primary targets or collateral damage of no concern? I suppose it only really does to people whom try to take sides.
And you are missing the obvious conclusion to your, and I use the term loosely, "philosophy". If they stop attacking Israel, then Israel will stop retaliating. If they don't stop they will just get more or the same. It's a rather simple concept.solitaria said:
Israel is not attacking because of the "threat" of an attack on them. They are responding to actual attacks.
This obviously proves your concept of hateful is different than what most reasonable people in our culture consider it to be.solitaria said:
Maybe you'd better be careful or you could be next. But then the truly hateful ones can't control what they spew forth. The hate overwhelms them.
I believe the most widely accepted definition of terrorism calls it ' an act against primarily civilian populations intended to sway the overall populationn to a particular point of view' Terrorism, in this sense was widely practiced in WWII, and this definition would fit the Israeli attack on Gaza(since the Israelis have made a point about claiming that the Gazan deaths were the result of Hamas actions.)solitaria said:
Do you really have that much trouble comprehending my argument?fuji said:
I said if we took your philosophy to its end point all of the Palestinian people would be obliterated in the Gaza strip because Israel would have to defend itself against any and all threats no matter how small.
However, fortunately, there are world leaders and populations much wiser and saner than you, whom don't allow Israel to go that far with their "self defense" measures and whom understand why its not a good idea to follow rules and maxims like "minimum self-defense" off a cliff and cause a humanitarian crisis.
You're an extremist Fuji. I dislike extremists. You and Hamas are different sides of the same coin.
These arguements have been going on for a long time and it is extremely doubtful they will end here on terb.
Comparing Israel and Hamas is somewht of a joke though no laughing matter. Anyone who doesn't see the difference in their idealogy is beyond reason. Hamas fires rockets into civilian populated areas, with no, NO military target whatsoever. Just to scare, cause terror, and kill innocents. The reason for there firing rockets becomes moot once they launch at innocents whether they are citizens of Israel or anywhere else. Because they feel claim to land currently held by Israel does not justify rocket launching at innocents with no military objective, but an objective of terror.
Unfortunately for the people of Gaza Israel does not bow to terror as they have been through their fair share of it on a scale larger than what most of us comprehend. They respond militarily, within their rights, and unfortunately hamas hides and shields itself amongst it's owm women and children. They also fire rockets from civilain populated areas. All this in an effort to gain sympathy and support from easily impressionable Arabs who are so brainwashed they would argue the sky is red with straight faces and believe it. No response to terrorism is non proportional. Hamas is a punk organization made up of cowards who hide behind women and children and weep like little girls when cornered. It is hamas responsible for the unfortunate death of civilians in gaza.
Comparing Israel and Hamas is somewht of a joke though no laughing matter. Anyone who doesn't see the difference in their idealogy is beyond reason. Hamas fires rockets into civilian populated areas, with no, NO military target whatsoever. Just to scare, cause terror, and kill innocents. The reason for there firing rockets becomes moot once they launch at innocents whether they are citizens of Israel or anywhere else. Because they feel claim to land currently held by Israel does not justify rocket launching at innocents with no military objective, but an objective of terror.
Unfortunately for the people of Gaza Israel does not bow to terror as they have been through their fair share of it on a scale larger than what most of us comprehend. They respond militarily, within their rights, and unfortunately hamas hides and shields itself amongst it's owm women and children. They also fire rockets from civilain populated areas. All this in an effort to gain sympathy and support from easily impressionable Arabs who are so brainwashed they would argue the sky is red with straight faces and believe it. No response to terrorism is non proportional. Hamas is a punk organization made up of cowards who hide behind women and children and weep like little girls when cornered. It is hamas responsible for the unfortunate death of civilians in gaza.
