NationStates Jolt Archive

Now normally I avoid debating the Iraq war, for a few reasons, namely that there's enough people doing that already. But some similarities recently have been brought to light, I want to see what people think. I realise this will annoy the left-wing and most probably the right wing, but I'm entitled to my opinion and I'll try to deliver it in a non trolling way.

Ok, I hope there can be no disagreement that Israel is currently occupying Gaza and Britain (with others) are currently occupying Iraq.

Ok, next point, Israel's been suffering suicide bombings for a long time now, recently Britain suffered two as well, the first at least was claimed by an Al-Qaeda group, claiming its for the war in Iraq.
Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4660391.stm)
Rejoice for it is time to take revenge against the British Zionist Crusader government in retaliation for the massacres Britain is committing in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Palestinians claim to be oppressed by Israel, and that thats the only way they can retaliate is by blowing themselves up. The London bombers claim this is for the "massacres" Britain is commiting in Iraq, similar to the "oppression" that the Palestinians are currently facing.

A common criticism of Israel is that they kill people suspected of being terrorists, and even people who are known terrorists, such as Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the Hamas Spiritual Leader. Well this morning Britain shot down a man Suspected of being a suicide bomber (http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13391824,00.html).
"He half-tripped, was half-pushed to the floor.

"One of the police officers was holding a black automatic pistol in his left hand. They held it down to him and unloaded five shots into him. I saw it. He's dead, five shots, he's dead."
Very similar to what Israel does to suspected suicide bombers. These guys actually subdued him, then shot him five times. So I'd like to hear from both left and right wing, opinions on this comparison? Also, any British people formerly opposed to Israel who this has put things into perspective for them?

I'd personally say that the similarities are in fact some what accurate and would agree with your assessment in some respects.

Then again, I also believe Israel is oppressing Palestine and that the Americans and British are at war with Al-Qaeda and in war both sides get killed. So it shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone. Nor do I believe that you can be outraged by one act if not by the other. Because if you can, then you're a hypocrite!

I'd personally say that the similarities are in fact some what accurate and would agree with your assessment in some respects. Thank you, I take that as a compliment :)

Then again, I also believe Israel is oppressing Palestine and that the Americans and British are at war with Al-Qaeda and in war both sides get killed.
Well Israel is at war with Hamas and Al-Aqsa, and in war both sides get killed, plus the civilians that get caught in the crossfire.

You forgot that quote...that changes it from them just random assassinating somebody, to shooting somebody that was grabbing for another human being seemingly in a threating manner.

"The man burst in through the door to my right and grabbed hold of the pole and a person by the glass partition near the door"

I dont agree with appeasement. First, they bombed the USA in SA because there were troops in Saudi Arabia they claimed, then when the US left the story changed to because there were troops in all of the arabia...lets say they leave, then the next excuse will be because there are troops in any muslim country....

It is nothing but an excuse to commit actions, Hilter did the same thing, first he demanded austria, then sudentland (sp?), then just took the whole thing, then memel, then finally people said enough was enough with Danzig....

It is a test to see how far they can push it, that is all that is, and agreeing with them is appeasement plain and simple, stop being a Neville.

Well Israel is at war with Hamas and Al-Aqsa, and in war both sides get killed, plus the civilians that get caught in the crossfire.

I would agree with that as well.

Then again, I also believe Israel is oppressing Palestine and that the Americans and British are at war with Al-Qaeda and in war both sides get killed. So it shouldn't really be a surprise to anyone. Nor do I believe that you can be outraged by one act if not by the other. Because if you can, then you're a hypocrite!
There is, of course, an important distinction to be made here. For the Israelis and the British, this war is a war on the terrorist organizations, and the primary targets are terrorists. When innocent civilians get killed by mistake, it is exactly that- a mistake. For Hamas and Al-Qaeda, ALL people in Israel and Britain are targets, and their killing of civilians is always deliberate. Which is why you CAN be outraged by one act and not by the other without any hypocracy involved. :rolleyes:

There is, of course, an important distinction to be made here. For the Israelis and the British, this war is a war on the terrorist organizations, and the primary targets are terrorists. When innocent civilians get killed by mistake, it is exactly that- a mistake. For Hamas and Al-Qaeda, ALL people in Israel and Britain are targets, and their killing of civilians is always deliberate. Which is why you CAN be outraged by one act and not by the other without any hypocracy involved. :rolleyes:

I'm sure Al-Qaeda and the Hamas et al see the Americans/British/Israel as terrorists too. Innocent people get killed on both sides.

Killing innocents, is killing innocents. One you call "terrorism", the other you call "collateral damage" Me? I say a rose by any other name is still a rose!

For some reason, I'm not exactly sure what point your trying to make. I mean this in no offense, I'm just trying to clarify. Are you just pointing out the similarities between Israel's actions and this British action, or are you suggesting Britain is becoming more like Israel by this action? I'm not following (probably because I'm sleepy, and thinking of food).

I'm sure Al-Qaeda and the Hamas et al see the Americans/British/Israel as terrorists too.
They see THE ENTIRE POPULATION of the US/Britain/Israel as enemies. Do you really not realize the difference? :rolleyes:


Innocent people get killed on both sides.

Killing innocents, is killing innocents. One you call "terrorism", the other you call "collateral damage" Me? I say a rose by any other name is still a rose!
Of course. Someone so thoroughly schooled in moral relativism could hardly say anything different. But I live in the real world, and I know that there is murder and there is accident, and it is equating the two that really constitutes hypocricy.

(Btw, you might remember me Steph. I used to be Womblingdon).

For some reason, I'm not exactly sure what point your trying to make. I mean this in no offense, I'm just trying to clarify. Are you just pointing out the similarities between Israel's actions and this British action, or are you suggesting Britain is becoming more like Israel by this action? I'm not following (probably because I'm sleepy, and thinking of food).
No, I'm pointing out that suddenly Brits have a chance to live as we live, and to see if its changed any of their opinions on it. I am pointing out the similar circumstances, the similar reactions, and seeing if its opened anyones eyes.

Also, Gulf Republics, may I ask what the hell are you going on about? Did you post it in the wrong topic or are you just trolling?

Of course. Someone so thoroughly schooled in moral relativism could hardly say anything different. But I live in the real world, and I know that there is murder and there is accident, and it is equating the two that really constitutes hypocricy.

(Btw, you might remember me Steph. I used to be Womblingdon).

OMG! Wom! hehe. Hi! :)

Now, now, you don't have to go insulting me just because we disagree. I live in the real world too. And just for the record, both outrage me.!

Not all killings or shall we call it "collateral damage" is an accident. Most of the time it's an acceptable amount of innocents to kill to hit a) b) or c) target. I like to use WWII as an example. (While I understand they were all soldiers, it still makes the point) In WWII on June 6th (D-Day) Eisenhower knew that a rough estimate that between 20 and 30% of the allies would be killed, but the gains if they succeeded out-weighed the cost of such a high casualty rate. The same is true today. When they are in their war rooms, they know darn well that a certain number of innocents are going to be killed but see it as justifiable collateral damage. This has always been the case.

I'm sure if Al-Qaeda and Hamas and their ilk had the same military advantage as the Americans/British/Israel they would operate the same way, but they don't. Thus for them to even make a mark, this is how they must do it, or otherwise quit.

War is dirty business and no side is righteous when it comes to war. I hate it. I do realize that sometimes there is nothing we can do to avoid it, but it doesn't mean I have to like it.

A common criticism of Israel is that they kill people suspected of being terrorists, and even people who are known terrorists, such as Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, the Hamas Spiritual Leader. Well this morning Britain shot down a man Suspected of being a suicide bomber (http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13391824,00.html).

This puzzled me. Who in their right mind would criticize Israel for killing terrorists? The terrorists kill Israeli citizens, so being killed in their turn sounds like fair payback.

OMG! Wom! hehe. Hi! :)
Not all killings or shall we call it "collateral damage" is an accident. Most of the time it's an acceptable amount of innocents to kill to hit a) b) or c) target. I like to use WWII as an example. (While I understand they were all soldiers, it still makes the point) In WWII on June 6th (D-Day) Eisenhower knew that a rough estimate that between 20 and 30% of the allies would be killed, but the gains if they succeeded out-weighed the cost of such a high casualty rate. The same is true today. When they are in their war rooms, they know darn well that a certain number of innocents are going to be killed but see it as justifiable collateral damage. This has always been the case.
Your analogy is absolutely flawed, and I think you realise it, otherwise you wouldn't put in that little "while I understand..." semi-disclaimer. Suicide bombings and other terrorist attacks on civilian population are not military operations. In fact, in order to carry out attacks on civilians, the terrorists usually have to bypass the much easier accessible military targets.


I'm sure if Al-Qaeda and Hamas and their ilk had the same military advantage as the Americans/British/Israel they would operate the same way, but they don't. Thus for them to even make a mark, this is how they must do it, or otherwise quit.
This is the kind of argument I could never comprehend. It's merely an eloquent way to give every Jack the Ripper out there a free pass. So you think being militarily weaker justifies indiscriminate attacks on defenseless civilians? Well then, no murderer or terrorist ever can be blamed then. For example, if Timothy McVeigh had an army with which he could confront the US government armed forces, he wouldn't blow up 160 people in Oklahoma City, but since he had no army, what choice did the poor dear have? If the abortion clinic bombers had their own police with which they could enforce their view on how pregnant women should behave, they would never blow up doctors- but they are weak and so they have to kill to get their point across. :rolleyes:

Wom - It's not that simple. Certainly not as simple as you make it sound. You make it sound like Israel has never been anything but angels to the Palestinians. That there is no reason for what they do, that they just woke up one day and decided to start killing civilians. It's not that way and you know it.

Anyway, I shall agree to disagree with you. I'm sure on many points we would agree. But you live in Israel, so, you're not the world's most objective person when it comes to that conflict. However, I don't discount that you do know what you're talking about, you just see it differently than I do. Which is ok! We don't have to agree. That's the beauty of debate.

Anyway, hope all is well with you. Haven't seen you around in a long time! :)

Wom - It's not that simple. Certainly not as simple as you make it sound. You make it sound like Israel has never been anything but angels to the Palestinians. That there is no reason for what they do, that they just woke up one day and decided to start killing civilians. It's not that way and you know it.

There is no reason for Israeli civilians to die, and I'm sure you know that too. Whatever wrongs the Palestinian people have suffered, blowing up innocent Israelis will not do a damn thing to help right those wrongs.

you live in Israel, so, you're not the world's most objective person when it comes to that conflict.
Excuse me??? All the sugar coating in the rest of your post won't make me swallow this little sting. You make it sound like you're somehow more "objective" than I am by the virtue of you being an outsider. Newsflash, Steph- your views are dictated by your schooling and political biases just as much as mine are dictated by my own schooling and biases. I could even argue that you are by far MORE biased, since your opinion is not in any way based on first hand knowledge, but only on information that was relayed to you by assorted third parties, who are themselves full of biases.

Don't even think of using THAT argument against me.

Wom - It's not that simple. Certainly not as simple as you make it sound. You make it sound like Israel has never been anything but angels to the Palestinians. That there is no reason for what they do, that they just woke up one day and decided to start killing civilians. It's not that way and you know it.
every terrorist has "his reasons". the israeli "opression" was in his lowness while they start the second intifada.
al-qaida had her "reasons" for the terror. "reasons" don't justified anything.
israel don't aim the civilians. we aim the terrorists who use human wall of civilians as defence. the terrorists aim civilians. any judical system will tell you the difference between intent act, and un-intent acts.