6/24/2002: Another Palestinian child - Page 4

elSicomoro · 06-25-2002, 10:04 PM

What? No "dichead?"

jaguar · 06-26-2002, 04:33 AM

OK, i'm back here now.
Dham, lets go though this. I posted what i posted because you choose the simplest possible conclusion of the facts rather than putting them in context.

Quote:

Far and away the biggest problem when it comes to Arafat reigning in militants is that Arafat is unwilling to do so. Images frequently come along of dead "collaborators" being dragged down the streets by militants. This is not possible in Israel, because its police force would put a stop to it. The Palestinian police force is, quite simply, apathetic. They don't care.

The first question is *why would he*
Isreal have offered nothing, nothing real has even been suggested, i don't think if arafat wanted he could reign in militants without being removed himself but even is he could he has no motivation to. The second is simple, if brutal, Mossad is effective, and ruthless, anyone that becomes a mossad turncoat needs to be made a good example of becase they cannot afford to have operations disruped by Mossad. yes, that is brutal.

As for targeting, i don't see much difference between a palastinain woman and 2 of her children who were cut in half on the way to answering the door by an isreli explosive, both were calous, and considering the looting, shooting at medical vehicles, using medical personel as human shields, using civvies as human shields and to test for traps that there is the slighest bit of difference, both sides clearly are not respecting the rules of war. The Isreali sholders are no different to treatment of Vietnamese civvies by US troops during the Vietnam war.

Undertoad · 06-26-2002, 09:19 AM

Why would he?

You meant to add, "besides the fact that it's morally reprehensible", of course. "Besides the fact that it's creating a deeply broken culture that worships death and promotes hate and violence in its six-year-olds." I'm sure you meant to add.

Remember how a few weeks ago Arafat suddenly said OK, that Clinton plan was good, we'll accept that now. He didn't get anywhere with that idea, because after 20 months of Intifada it was way off the table.

So suicide bombing has been more than ineffective at promoting the cause of statehood; it has, in effect, polarized the diplomatic atmosphere against Arafat, especially in a post-9/11 world.

The question should be "why WOULDN'T he?" The reason: because it's only while he is the center of Islamic rage against the world that he has any power whatsoever. The Arabic leaders are all like "We must help the cause of our brothers in Palestine!" because they have a wet dream of defeating the West, somewhere, anywhere. So they send him money, and they send him weapons, and a while back there was an unverified report that $5.1 million of Arabic assistance money found its way to Arafat's personal bank account.

jaguar · 06-26-2002, 11:18 PM

Quote:

and a while back there was an unverified report that $5.1 million of Arabic assistance money found its way to Arafat's personal bank account.

Well count me converted on that rock had evidence.

Little would change in the palastinian situation if they did stop, its not like Isreal is going to turn roudn and grant a state becase Lukid policies worked so once again, why would they? And don't give me morality, its irrelavent to this part of it.

Btw: no, i didn't mean to add anything and i'm not in the sligest aplogetic for it, sure, its horrible but its not in their interest, its all politics.

Nic Name · 06-26-2002, 11:42 PM

When Bush says the Palestinians must choose a new leader, does he mean in the American sense of whoever gets the most popular votes loses?

When Sharon says the Palestinians need a new leader, does he mean in the Israeli sense that the elected leader is assassinated so someone else can rise to power?

Or, do they mean it in the Kofi Annan sense that if the Palestinians re-elect Arafat, the world leaders will have to recognize him as the legitimate leader of the Palestinians?

Really, I don't think Arafat will live to see the next election, if he pursues re-election. So, I guess I'm saying that the proposal is for an Israeli-style election.

jaguar · 06-26-2002, 11:50 PM

If they knocked him off the result would be............it'd involve allot of red stuff. Everywhere. But yes, democratic in bushepak means the person we want.

Count Zero · 06-27-2002, 03:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dhamsaic
Do you truly actually believe this? I mean really? I fail to see the correlation between "trying to live" and blowing oneself up in an effort to murder innocent citizens. Is there something I'm missing here? One is trying to live by taking their own life? Huh?

Very few of the Palestinians commit any type of terrorism. They neither have the will or the resources.

Quote:

Furthermore, how do you explain Fatah's previous unwillingness to concede Israel's right to exist and Hamas and Islamic Jihad's constant efforts to derail the peace process and destroy Israel? This is their stated goal. It's not a side effect of "trying to live".

You're taking the actions of a few to represent the will of the majority, and that's ridiculous.

Quote:

Nevermind the 51% of Palestinians that support the destruction of Israel.

Of course. They're being massacred by the Israeli army for generations. Completely understandable. Keep in mind that you can't compare the killing done by the Israeli army to the killing done by Palestinian suicide bombs. Not by the longest shot.

What you said is just tabloid argument.

Quote:

I guess "trying to live" nowadays means killing little girls on buses or shooting them point blank in their homes. What about the Israelis that are just trying to live? Where's your argument for them? Rachel Levy was just going to the grocery store for some food. That is "trying to live". She got blown up by a suicide bomber. That is murder.

First tabloid argument, then cheap sentimentalism.

How about the hundreds of little kids and innocents civilians killed by Sharon's army during one of it's mass murders? Can you do simple math? Is Israeli blood better that Palestinian? The US government apparently thinks so.

Of course the murder of Israelis is awful, but the point it that the overwhelmingly bigger number of deaths is on the Palestinian side, and the overwhelmingly majority of civilians. Nothing justifies this. Certainly not the "fight against terrorism". Total annihilation and ethnic cleansing is the worse form of terrorism, and is the one the US is most familiar with in terms of support. Does Turkey ring a bell? Probably not...

Quote:

Whereas Israel targets those who target Israel, Palestinian extremists target little kids.

Oh, please...
How can a whole settlement, with not enough food or water, target Israel ?

Look. You are _very_ uninformed about the whole business. I'm certainly no expert, but here are a few texts that were very enlightening to me:

http://www.zmag.org/content/Mideast/chomlateline.cfm
http://www.zmag.org/content/Mideast/chomskyconstr.cfm
http://www.zmag.org/shalom-meqa.htm
http://www.zmag.org/content/Mideast/pilger_june19.cfm

I suggest you take a look at them, and at everything else at www.zmag.org for that matter.

06-27-2002, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Count Zero
Oh, please...
How can a whole settlement, with not enough food or water, target Israel ?

It finally hit me, when I read this, why you come off sounding like such a knob. You're misinterpreting what I'm writing. I am very clearly saying Palestinian extremists and you're interpreting it to mean "all Palestinians". So how about you go re-read what I said with that in mind.

warch · 06-27-2002, 05:40 PM

The image of the kid is beyond politics. It is a growing, dynamic culture of hate and death. I'd like to think there is some instinctive survival element that regulates violent behavior, finds balance, but its short circuited here with the justification of death/violence for survival. And the problem I have with Arabic culture keeps going back to sexism and the oppression of women. Not just extremists, but the majority. Now, I tend to think that gender differences/ rationales can be too simplistic and too quickly tossed down, but we need some powerful maternal life-affirming love to rise up against this self destructive patriarchy. It has to be a leader from within. Sexism is the main reason why my sympathies align more with Israel, although I am not blind to their atrocities.

Count Zero · 06-27-2002, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by dhamsaic

It finally hit me, when I read this, why you come off sounding like such a knob. You're misinterpreting what I'm writing. I am very clearly saying Palestinian extremists and you're interpreting it to mean "all Palestinians". So how about you go re-read what I said with that in mind.

You said:

Quote:

Whereas Israel targets those who target Israel, Palestinian extremists target little kids.

I said that Israel does not target those who target Israel, they target everyone that happens to be Palestinian, by killing them and destroying their homes, exactly like the Palestinian suicide bombers. The only difference is the order of magnitude, and the fact that Israeli weapons and training were paid with American tax-payer money.

Where exactly is my misinterpretation ?

elSicomoro · 06-27-2002, 07:46 PM

Our differences are obvious. But, is there anything we can agree on? Israel and Palestine both deserve their own states? Innocents are being killed on both sides?

Anyone, anyone?

jaguar · 06-28-2002, 09:19 AM

Its pretty fucking horrible however you look at it?
Christan nutters (see other thread) are bad?
Fish on pizza is just plain wrong?

06-28-2002, 09:30 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Count Zero
I said that Israel does not target those who target Israel, they target everyone that happens to be Palestinian, by killing them and destroying their homes

This is absolutely false. It is not Israeli policy to target and attack "everyone that happens to be Palestinian". If it were, you would see a lot more tanks-firing-into-markets incidents. I will absolutely agree with you that invidivual soldiers within IDF have intentionally killed innocent Palestinians, but your submission that Israel targets all Palestinians is false. The fighting would have been over long ago if this were true.

Count Zero · 06-28-2002, 11:08 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by dhamsaic

This is absolutely false. It is not Israeli policy to target and attack "everyone that happens to be Palestinian". If it were, you would see a lot more tanks-firing-into-markets incidents. I will absolutely agree with you that invidivual soldiers within IDF have intentionally killed innocent Palestinians, but your submission that Israel targets all Palestinians is false. The fighting would have been over long ago if this were true.

Here's a quote from a text written by Shamai Leibowitz, an Orthodox Jew and a criminal defense attorney in Tel Aviv and is also a tank gunner in reserve duty, and part of a group of 1000 soldiers who have refused to serve in the occupied territories (http://www.couragetorefuse.org/) :

Quote:

Now that President Bush has enlightened us with his new "Plan" for the Middle East, we can only wonder how long it will take him to realize that his plan is useless and meaningless. Although his speech was riddled with rosy descriptions he envisions for the utopian Palestinian State in the far future, George W. Bush managed to avoid any mention of the present situation in the same parcel of land where all these wonderful things are to materialize. No mention of the fact that all West Bank cities had been invaded by Israeli military forces; that hundreds of thousands of inhabitants are imprisoned in their homes by a strict curfew, and that civilians appearing on city streets are being shot at like dogs by Israeli tanks and Apache helicopters.

I'm sure these were all terrorists... (Keep in mind that an Israeli Officer wrote that.)

The whole text is at http://www.zmag.org/content/showarti...22&ItemID=2042

There's a lot more where that came from, and other countless evidences of massacres done by the Israeli army, so your response couldn't be lamer.

06-28-2002, 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Count Zero
I'm sure these were all terrorists... (Keep in mind that an Israeli Officer wrote that.)

...

There's a lot more where that came from, and other countless evidences of massacres done by the Israeli army, so your response couldn't be lamer.

Again, you are refusing to acknowledge a very simple truth: the IDF is not targeting all Palestinians, because if they were, they would have all been wiped out long ago. Imposing a strict curfew is hardly targetting "everyone that happens to be Palestinian."

As for whether they deserve that curfew or not... 51% of Palestinians represent the destruction of Israel. No pity for the majority.

06-26-2002, 11:50 PM	#51
jaguar whig Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 5,075	If they knocked him off the result would be............it'd involve allot of red stuff. Everywhere. But yes, democratic in bushepak means the person we want. __________________ Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain

06-28-2002, 09:19 AM	#57
jaguar whig Join Date: Apr 2001 Posts: 5,075	Its pretty fucking horrible however you look at it? Christan nutters (see other thread) are bad? Fish on pizza is just plain wrong? __________________ Good friends, good books and a sleepy conscience: this is the ideal life. - Twain

06-25-2002, 10:04 PM	#46
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	What? No "dichead?"

06-26-2002, 09:19 AM	#48
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Why would he? You meant to add, "besides the fact that it's morally reprehensible", of course. "Besides the fact that it's creating a deeply broken culture that worships death and promotes hate and violence in its six-year-olds." I'm sure you meant to add. Remember how a few weeks ago Arafat suddenly said OK, that Clinton plan was good, we'll accept that now. He didn't get anywhere with that idea, because after 20 months of Intifada it was way off the table. So suicide bombing has been more than ineffective at promoting the cause of statehood; it has, in effect, polarized the diplomatic atmosphere against Arafat, especially in a post-9/11 world. The question should be "why WOULDN'T he?" The reason: because it's only while he is the center of Islamic rage against the world that he has any power whatsoever. The Arabic leaders are all like "We must help the cause of our brothers in Palestine!" because they have a wet dream of defeating the West, somewhere, anywhere. So they send him money, and they send him weapons, and a while back there was an unverified report that $5.1 million of Arabic assistance money found its way to Arafat's personal bank account.

06-26-2002, 11:42 PM	#50
Nic Name retired Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Toronto, Canada Posts: 1,930	When Bush says the Palestinians must choose a new leader, does he mean in the American sense of whoever gets the most popular votes loses? When Sharon says the Palestinians need a new leader, does he mean in the Israeli sense that the elected leader is assassinated so someone else can rise to power? Or, do they mean it in the Kofi Annan sense that if the Palestinians re-elect Arafat, the world leaders will have to recognize him as the legitimate leader of the Palestinians? Really, I don't think Arafat will live to see the next election, if he pursues re-election. So, I guess I'm saying that the proposal is for an Israeli-style election.

06-27-2002, 05:40 PM	#54
warch lurkin old school Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Minnesota Posts: 2,796	The image of the kid is beyond politics. It is a growing, dynamic culture of hate and death. I'd like to think there is some instinctive survival element that regulates violent behavior, finds balance, but its short circuited here with the justification of death/violence for survival. And the problem I have with Arabic culture keeps going back to sexism and the oppression of women. Not just extremists, but the majority. Now, I tend to think that gender differences/ rationales can be too simplistic and too quickly tossed down, but we need some powerful maternal life-affirming love to rise up against this self destructive patriarchy. It has to be a leader from within. Sexism is the main reason why my sympathies align more with Israel, although I am not blind to their atrocities.

06-27-2002, 07:46 PM	#56
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	Our differences are obvious. But, is there anything we can agree on? Israel and Palestine both deserve their own states? Innocents are being killed on both sides? Anyone, anyone?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)