NationStates Jolt Archive

As I have stated before in this post, colateral damage (innocent civilians) is a very unfortunate aspect of war. The civilians were not the target. Unfortunatly, they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Most armies try to do everything they can to minimize collateral damage, but can not eliminate it.


Neat how it seems that it is primarily civilian casualties involved. Of course, we're not even considering the number of people, primarily children, the elderly, and the infirm, who will suffer because of the destruction of critical infrastructure (i.e, electrical, sewage, etc)in Gaza and Lebanon. Ah well.. it is an unfortunate affect of war... besides... the bad guys are suffering. The bad guys.. who were they now?
Oh yeah, the bad guys lob random rockets, attack children at play...yeah the bad guys. Which side was that... because it looks like to me not one side in this idiotic conflict can claim the high road.

I have read and understand every one of your posts on this forum. Most of what you have provided is not "evidence" but your opinion. Some of that opinion has been backed up by facts, but facts can be interpreted in more than one way.

Fact: a bomb was dropped.
Fact: Civilians die.
Opinion: The civilians were in the wrong place at the wrong time (collateral damage.)
Opinion: The civilians were deliberately targeted.

Understand?

I'm not talking about just bombs... although that does raise the spectre of dropping bombs on gas stations in civilian concentration areas.

I'm looking at the whole picture. Multiple missile strikes on multiple civilian cars.

That sounds like targetting... not 'my opinion of' targetting.

That is not happening jackass.
How do you get away with calling someone a troll, then calling someone a jackass?

Ah, hypocrisy.

Since your the one with an over inflated ego who cannot take an opposing view and denounce those who do as wrong, your the one flaming troll.

Let me get this straight...

Because YOU say I have "an over inflated ego"... I am the one 'flaming', and a 'troll'?

You don't see any irony in that comment?

It would appear that death of innocent civilians er.... "co-lateral damage" is way too high during the current Israeli offensive.

I agree.

This is entirely disproportionate.

Neat how it seems that it is primarily civilian casualties involved. Of course, we're not even considering the number of people, primarily children, the elderly, and the infirm, who will suffer because of the destruction of critical infrastructure (i.e, electrical, sewage, etc)in Gaza and Lebanon. Ah well.. it is an unfortunate affect of war... besides... the bad guys are suffering. The bad guys.. who were they now?
Oh yeah, the bad guys lob random rockets, attack children at play...yeah the bad guys. Which side was that... because it looks like to me not one side in this idiotic conflict can claim the high road.

Nah, they'll just play their worn out copy of the Persecution Complex Card, the dog-eared one that keeps telling people the Holocaust just happened yesterday.

Corn, don't feed him and maybe he will go away. As for me, I need to go to the post office and grocery store. Good evening.

A drive-by? Flame by proxy?

I'm not saying they should have done nothing. Doing nothing but sitting there would certainly have emboldened those already in Al-Qaeda and would probably result in another attack at some point.

But the "even more" point I must question. Doing nothing, while certainly not a good idea, would probably have been better than villainising entire Islamic states in the way that they have done.

Those we call Terrorists (yes, I call them that too) attacked the West because they feared we were trying to destroy their way of life and abuse their people for our own gains with our cultural spread, our authoritive religion and our materialist fancies. Marking out Islamic states as active targets, throwing billions of dollars into an offensive campaign and installing puppet regimes was exactly the sort of response that justifies those fears and gives them ammunition in the ideological fight for the hearts and minds of the people of the middle east.

Solidarity with the people should have been our aim from the get go. The US, immediately after the attacks, had the stage to itself and the ideal opportunity to stand up and demonstrate how it was completely undeserving of what it was being accused of. It could have pledged to defeat terrorism and oppression in one fell swoop by bringing social and economic aid to the everyday middle-eastern citizen. It could have engaged in multilateral discussions with representatives of the Iraqi, Afghan, Iranian, Israeli, Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese people (to name but a few) to find out exactly what their troubles were. It was given the clearest chance in recent history to spread a message of peace and reconsiliation and bring an end to the previous century of war and conflict; to create a world where terrorist activity would never occur and the words of its selfish proponents would fall on deaf ears. And it, as a nation, rejected that chance unanimously.

... Wow. That was far more vicious than I intended it to be. I think I'll post it anyway for dramatic value, but all I'm saying is that the US could certainly have conducted its response in a more controlled and responsible manner.
Well stated!! :)

Not sure about that, but I am sure about who escalated the Middle East problems......Senor Bush-kebob.

President Delivers State of the Union Address (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html)
That actually made me hate him about 20% more.

"Yes, I'll just abuse the tragedy of September 11th and use it as a reason to kill yet more people in a country that had nothing to do with it."

Also, claiming that the situation in Afghanistan is any more democratic is a jke of the highest order. The government has no support, and its juristiction ends around its own district of Kabul.

They may be throwing parties for Sheikhs and world leaders at l'Atmosphere (I believe that's where they held that large meeting a bit ago), but a few miles away, you can bet that the average Afghani is no better off...

*sighs*
Apparently so. :(
Indeed, it is quite depressing. In fact, horribly depressing :(

A drive-by? Flame by proxy?

Or a Bushevik hand-job backpat conga line.

Since your the one with an over inflated ego who cannot take an opposing view and denounce those who do as wrong, your the one flaming troll.
Calm down Corny. Calling people "dumbasses" and "jackasses" is not exactly conducive to the debate (if you want to call it that), nor does it constitute anything close to factually representing your argument.

You have been asked to support your arguments. Doing so will help the debate move along.

Indeed, it is quite depressing. In fact, horribly depressing :(
But it is not hopeless. Somewhere in there is a solution lying with the everyday people. All they need is someone to bring it to the surface for them.

Nah, they'll just play their worn out copy of the Persecution Complex Card, the dog-eared one that keeps telling people the Holocaust just happened yesterday.

Please note, Gauthier, I said NO ONE in this idiotic conflict can claim the high road. With no regard to their own people, or the children, and others who are only to stand by helplessly... Three diseperate groups of people have chosen of their own violition to play ping pong with missiles, bombs, and machine guns.
I'm sorry, but no religion, Judaism, Islam, or Christianity, advocates disregard for those who are least able to protect themselves. In fact, quite the opposite. It doesn't matter what side of a political border they live on. Humanity's ability to rise above barbarism is measured in how it cares for those who cannot care for themselves.
Whatever the political or religions arguments that are going on over there the bottom line is this... they simply do not CARE ENOUGH, none of them, to take the high road.
Everyone on this planet has a reason to be aggrieved at someone else. Everyone can claim some heritage of pain. But no one has the right to create another generation who has to suffer the same. Israel creates new terrorists with every orphaned child a bomb leaves behind. Hezballah and Hamas creates a new soldier every time it bombs a bus, or tosses a rocket randomly across a border.
WAKE UP... not one side can come up spelling like roses. They all smell like camel dung and the people who are hurting most are the children.

Calm down Corny. Calling people "dumbasses" and "jackasses" is not exactly conducive to the debate (if you want to call it that), nor does it constitute anything close to factually representing your argument.

You have been asked to support your arguments. Doing so will help the debate move along.

Sorry but the evidence has already been provided and Gni has refused to acknowledge the evidence. Alwell. It is what I have come to expect from tools.

But it is not hopeless. Somewhere in there is a solution lying with the everyday people. All they need is someone to bring it to the surface for them.
Well yes, but that's treason ;)

It is what I have come to expect from tools.

Seriously, continuing to insult people wins you no friends and even less respect. You have already been courteously asked to stop doing it and I would repeat that request more obviously.

Well yes, but that's treason ;)
Well... I didn't exactly mean that kind of solution, but I suppose that is one option. I was thinking more along the lines of appealing to their human nature. La Revolution has, however, typically shown itself to be a rather harsh mistress.

Sorry.. It is what I have come to expect from tools.
You lie! You're not really sorry at all! >_<;;

Well... I didn't exactly mean that kind of solution, but I suppose that is one option. I was thinking more along the lines of appealing to their human nature. La Revolution has, however, typically shown itself to be a rather harsh mistress.
If you appeal to their nature then a revolution is what you'll get :)

Whether you think that's good or bad is your own decision, really.

As I said yesterday on another post on a similar thread, the key issue is the fact that both Iran and Syria have geopolitical ambitions in the area. As long as, this will not be addressed by the international community, forget about any long lasting peace agreement in the area, even if Palestinians and Israelis are wanting to achieve it.
Unfortunately the international community does not seem able (apparently) to agree on anything when it comes to the Middle East: The USA traditionally backs Israel, thus driving Russia and China to a more critical approach so that they can have some influence in the region as well. As for Europe (and being European I feel at ease to say what I think about it), well forget their foreign policy, traditionally they only wake up when the bombs fall on their back yard (and even so, not always). One just needs to remember that before they decided to declare war to Germany in 1939, they kept negotiating well after the “Anschluss” of Austria, the fall and Czechoslovakia (literally given to the Germans as the outcome of the Munich talks). Only when Poland was invaded Britain and France reacted. Any reaction by Europe will always depend on the electoral calendar of any of the major players.
So what to do with Iran and Syria? The UN will never approve sanctions, so the position of the major powers (USA, Europe, Russia and China) is rather comfortable and something of the kind: “Lets talk about diplomacy and let Israel do the dirty work for us, in case things go wrong Israel can always be blamed”. And this is not mere fantasy, this is "realpolitik".
In view of this, many of the posts I have seen here are totally senseless, irrespective of the side they are aligned with.
I say what I have said before, the current situation as very little to do with the Israel-Palestinian conflict, and all to do with Iran and Syria ambitions in the area.

Sorry but the evidence has already been provided and Gni has refused to acknowledge the evidence. Alwell. It is what I have come to expect from tools.
I am sorry too, because I don't see any evidence from you, just your normal opinions. However, because you disagree doesn't mean that you call someone a "jackass or dumbass", and now as this post shows, a "tool".

Nah, they'll just play their worn out copy of the Persecution Complex Card, the dog-eared one that keeps telling people the Holocaust just happened yesterday.

Come off it man. The Holocaust showed the world the true evil that man can accomplish and is widely discussed because the sooner we forget about it, or trivialize like YOU JUST DID, the sooner we will let it happen again. The Holocaust is a constant reminder of what idleness and apathy can do and should be used as such so the world doesn't let it happen either again to the Jews or to someone else. It's obviously a soft spot for Jews, but we Jews invoke the Holocaust not for any type of sympathy but to rally everyone who values life and humanity to the causes that seek to defeat persecution of all sorts. Jew have gotten the short end of the stick for most of our history and by invoking the Holocaust we say to the world that we will not go quietly again to the slaughter and that we will always be vigilant in the defense of our people.

Come off it man. The Holocaust showed the world the true evil that man can accomplish and is widely discussed because the sooner we forget about it, or trivialize like YOU JUST DID, the sooner we will let it happen again. The Holocaust is a constant reminder of what idleness and apathy can do and should be used as such so the world doesn't let it happen either again to the Jews or to someone else. It's obviously a soft spot for Jews, but we Jews invoke the Holocaust not for any type of sympathy but to rally everyone who values life and humanity to the causes that seek to defeat persecution of all sorts. Jew have gotten the short end of the stick for most of our history and by invoking the Holocaust we say to the world that we will not go quietly again to the slaughter and that we will always be vigilant in the defense of our people.

The only thing that trivializes the Holocaust is bringing it up like a carte blanche hall pass to do whatever the hell one pleases because anyone who questions the appropriateness must be a Neo-Nazi bent on finishing the Final Solution. Looks like Israel's finally bitten off more than it can chew and when the choking starts that's when they throw the nukes. Not to mention how people have this perception that "Never Again" seems to only apply to the Israelis, given how Rwanda and Darfur went on as scheduled.

Come off it man. The Holocaust showed the world the true evil that man can accomplish.
No it didn't. The Rwandan Massacre did. The holocaust is almost a sideshow to such a horrible event that happened almost overnight.

That is not happening jackass.

It was "fool" before I went off for a bit, now its "jackass"..... Tut tut.

The Holocaust is a constant reminder of what idleness and apathy can do and should be used as such so the world doesn't let it happen either again to the Jews or to someone else.
I don't agree with that exactly, though I do agree that the Holocaust is worth remembering for other reasons.

The holocaust did not occur because people were apathetic. The holocaust occurred because of a national and ethnic superiority complex and the need for a scapegoat. It was not until well into the war that the concentration of the Jewish people began and it occurred within a people that were not idle but brainwashed by the message of personal pride and the charisma of the National Socialists.

The biggest warning it can give us today is to be very wary of that which claims that a single group of people, whether we are a part of them or not, is either superior or inferior to any other, and I think everyone involved in the world today could do with bearing that in mind.

I don't agree with that exactly, though I do agree that the Holocaust is worth remembering for other reasons.

The holocaust did not occur because people were apathetic. The holocaust occurred because of a national and ethnic superiority complex and the need for a scapegoat. It was not until well into the war that the concentration of the Jewish people began and it occurred within a people that were not idle but brainwashed by the message of personal pride and the charisma of the National Socialists.

The biggest warning it can give us today is to be very wary of that which claims that a single group of people, whether we are a part of them or not, is either superior or inferior to any other, and I think everyone involved in the world today could do with bearing that in mind.

And the current warning sign is "We are all better than Muslims because they are all terrorists who kill innocent people."

And the current warning sign is "We are all better than Muslims because they are all terrorists who kill innocent people."

You want to compare levels of "tolerance" between Islamic states and Western ones then by all means do it. Try building a Mosque in London, after you're done try building a Church in Islamabad - which do you think will prove more difficult?

And the current warning sign is "We are all better than Muslims because they are all terrorists who kill innocent people."
True, but so is "They think they're better than Muslims" and "They think they're better than Israelis".

Current popular opinion is rife with pack criticism. We've all got to be careful about how we handle our generalisations and identities.

As I have stated before in this post, colateral damage (innocent civilians) is a very unfortunate aspect of war. The civilians were not the target. Unfortunatly, they were in the wrong place at the wrong time. Most armies try to do everything they can to minimize collateral damage, but can not eliminate it.

In a van, trying to get the fuck out of the place, or in a building for civil defence workers.....So I presume the "wrong place at the wrong time" refers to what I mentioned - being too close to an Arab. At least Hezbollah aren't on the news trying to piss on my head and tell me its raining.


Sorry for that but no tech is perfect but bridges, roads, airports, and powerplants are legit targets in a war..

So why are they firing at a van?


You seem to be unaware of, or don't care, that the terrorist enemy was not well-contemplated in the Geneva Conventions...

Neither is Israel as it refuses to apply it in the occupied territories, by order, since 1967.

Since the attacks are not indiscriminate, it doesn't apply...

So the vehicles and civillians houses are being selectively targeted then?

You want to compare levels of "tolerance" between Islamic states and Western ones then by all means do it. Try building a Mosque in London, after you're done try building a Church in Islamabad - which do you think will prove more difficult?

I can guarantee you will not build a church in Saudi Arabia. :(

You want to compare levels of "tolerance" between Islamic states and Western ones then by all means do it. Try building a Mosque in London, after you're done try building a Church in Islamabad - which do you think will prove more difficult?

And this justifies what? Acting like them? Bombing them and not giving a fuck?

You want to compare levels of "tolerance" between Islamic states and Western ones then by all means do it. Try building a Mosque in London, after you're done try building a Church in Islamabad - which do you think will prove more difficult?

When Pakistan becomes a true democratic republic and not an American Pet Dictatorship run by someone who has to appease the fanatics to keep his own ass in power and in one piece, that comparison might become somewhat valid.

I can guarantee you will not build a church in Saudi Arabia. :(

And yet the House of Saud is best buddies with Dear Leader, not to mention the country is considered an "Ally" in the "War on Terror™" despite its backwards society and being the Home of Wahabism.

And the current warning sign is "We are all better than Muslims because they are all terrorists who kill innocent people."
I concur. There have been many posts that unfortunately suggest that Muslims are "uncivilized", "savages", "ragheads", "scum", etc. The suggested cures for their unsuitablity (according to the posters) is to turn their countries into large parking lots, glass, or in one extreme case, it was suggested that Muslim males be sterilized to eventually remove them from the gene pool.

While I am ticked off by both sides in this current dispute, I am especially ticked at the Israelis. They are freewheeling right now due to their obvious military superiority, and unfortunately they are killing far too many civilians and exploiting the recent withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon.

Terrorism is indeed alive and well in the Middle East. :(

And yet the House of Saud is best buddies with Dear Leader, not to mention the country is considered an "Ally" in the "War on Terror™" despite its backwards society and being the Home of Wahabism.

Sad isn't it. :(

I concur. There have been many posts that unfortunately suggest that Muslims are "uncivilized", "savages", "ragheads", "scum", etc. The suggested cures for their unsuitablity (according to the posters) is to turn their countries into large parking lots, glass, or in one extreme case, it was suggested that Muslim males be sterilized to eventually remove them from the gene pool.

While I am ticked off by both sides in this current dispute, I am especially ticked at the Israelis. They are freewheeling right now due to their obvious military superiority, and unfortunately they are killing far too many civilians and exploiting the recent withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon.

Terrorism is indeed alive and well in the Middle East. :(

Israel is a lot more Kahanist than anyone wants to admit.

Sad isn't it. :(

It's the boldest symptom of the United States' historical bad habit of setting up alliances that fuck over a foreign native populace as long as "It's not happening to us."

It would appear that death of innocent civilians er.... "co-lateral damage" is way too high during the current Israeli offensive.

Oh of course, and colateral damage is always too high, during every war from the dawn of man.

But you agree it is colateral, and night just evil Israelis targeting elementry schools or something like that.

It's the boldest symptom of the United States' historical bad habit of setting up alliances that fuck over a foreign native populace as long as "It's not happening to us."

Ahh, so we are following our ancestors. We have learned (not well) from the British Empire. :(

You know, I'm becoming more and more of an isolationist although I know isolationism doesn't work. Especially in this modern world. Is it possible for a country to be in the world economy and politically isolated? Sounds like a new thread to me.

Ahh, so we are following our ancestors. We have learned (not well) from the British Empire. :(

You know, I'm becoming more and more of an isolationist although I know isolationism doesn't work. Especially in this modern world. Is it possible for a country to be in the world economy and politically isolated? Sounds like a new thread to me.
Switzerland?

Ahh, so we are following our ancestors. We have learned (not well) from the British Empire. :(

You know, I'm becoming more and more of an isolationist although I know isolationism doesn't work. Especially in this modern world. Is it possible for a country to be in the world economy and politically isolated? Sounds like a new thread to me.

switezereland, and their tramps have more money than both of us combined!

Ahh, so we are following our ancestors. We have learned (not well) from the British Empire. :(
I think you'll find that we gave people sanitation and transport, as well as a good postal service, in almost everywhere we went.
You know, I'm becoming more and more of an isolationist although I know isolationism doesn't work. Especially in this modern world. Is it possible for a country to be in the world economy and politically isolated? Sounds like a new thread to me.
Sweden says : ja

Oh of course, and colateral damage is always too high, during every war from the dawn of man.

But you agree it is colateral, and night just evil Israelis targeting elementry schools or something like that.
The obvious sarcasm alluded you?

It is more like a "we don't give a shit attitude".

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1821462,00.html

Israel's campaign, begun after Lebanese Hizbollah captured two soldiers and killed eight in a raid on an Israeli border patrol last Wednesday, has so far killed at least 100 people, all but three of them civilians, and choked off Lebanon's economy, including its growing tourism industry.

Everyone please calm down.

Everyone please calm down.
*CanuckHeaven is always calm. :D

Bah. So we have Israel dragging us into a war in the Middle East and Japan doing the same in the Far East.
Bring it on.
Maybe when it’s all over the population of the US will finally grow weary of war and join Europe and Canada in cooperating with the UN.

And this justifies what? Acting like them? Bombing them and not giving a fuck?

Well actually that's a bit of a logical leap. I was merely saying that when you start to talk about jingoism and intolerance a good place to start would be by looking a nations that execute homosexuals and brutalise and degrade women, whose national discourse is punctuated with racism, who persecute Hindus, Jews, Christians, Atheists and the like and who seek to kill and destroy anyone or anything that does not conform to their tyrannical theocracy.

Bah. So we have Israel dragging us into a war in the Middle East and Japan doing the same in the Far East.
Bring it on.
Maybe when it’s all over the population of the US will finally grow weary of war and join Europe and Canada in cooperating with the UN.

And just what has/can the UN contribute? Most governments know they are like a neutered tom cat. They can make a lot of noise but don't have the balls to do anything. I don't think I need to list the examples, but...Iran, North Korea, Dafur, Somolia and on and on and on...

When Pakistan becomes a true democratic republic and not an American Pet Dictatorship run by someone who has to appease the fanatics to keep his own ass in power and in one piece, that comparison might become somewhat valid.

Actually what you have said does not undermine my comparison at all. The currents that are so hostile to non-Islamic faiths and practices emanate from below and have nothing to do with the type of regime which rules them. Still, for the sake of compromise I'll suggest you try in Tehran, Damascus or Riyadh.

And just what has/can the UN contribute? Most governments know they are like a neutered tom cat. They can make a lot of noise but don't have the balls to do anything. I don't think I need to list the examples, but...Iran, North Korea, Dafur, Somolia and on and on and on.
That's because they don't have US support.

Actually what you have said does not undermine my comparison at all. The currents that are so hostile to non-Islamic faiths and practices emanate from below and have nothing to do with the type of regime which rules them. Still, for the sake of compromise I'll suggest you try in Tehran, Damascus or Riyadh.

Of course for the assumption that all Muslim nations are hostile to other religions to be true, you'd have to completely discount Lebanon which has approximately a half and half population of Christians as well as Muslims. But oh wait, Israel's busy turning it into a crater so I guess there won't be a country to get in the way of your Islamofascist Conspiracy Theories for much longer.

Bah. So we have Israel dragging us into a war in the Middle East and Japan doing the same in the Far East.
Bring it on.
Maybe when it’s all over the population of the US will finally grow weary of war and join Europe and Canada in cooperating with the UN.

Yeah - that haven of brotherhood, solidarity and enlightenment that is the UN, an organisation so feckless they could barely wipe their own ass without shitting on their fingers.

Yeah - that haven of brotherhood, solidarity and enlightenment that is the UN, an organisation so feckless they could barely wipe their own ass without shitting on their fingers.

The United Nations is a long time victim of the American lip service, in the same manner No Child Left Behind was cooked up as a publicity ploy with no real intention to give it a solid financial and political foundation.

Don't bitch about it not having what you never wanted it to have in the first place. Fucking disingenuous.

Of course for the assumption that all Muslim nations are hostile to other religions to be true, you'd have to completely discount Lebanon which has approximately a half and half population of Christians as well as Muslims. But oh wait, Israel's busy turning it into a crater so I guess there won't be a country to get in the way of your Islamofascist Conspiracy Theories for much longer.

Not all Muslims have to be hostile to other religions for what I say to be true, yet a very significant minority are. I can see why you are so willing to change the subject and talk about Israel, having to defend, excuse or ignore nihilistic chauvinists who blow up "sinful" manifestations of westernism like nightclubs in Bali or who beat up women who go outside without a male escort or without wearing purda cannot be an easy task.

Everyone please calm down.
I am calmer than a stoned Mr. T.

That's because they don't have US support.

Who was blocking the resolution by Japan calling for sanctions against North Korea? Who has been blocking action against Iran? Who had done anything about Somilia and Dafur? Don't blame all the UN inaction on the US. You know better than to do that.

I am calmer than a stoned Mr. T.

What you smoking? I want to try some of that. :D

Who was blocking the resolution by Japan calling for sanctions against North Korea? Who has been blocking action against Iran? Who had done anything about Somilia and Dafur? Don't blame all the UN inaction on the US. You know better than to do that.

I feel we should add Rwanda, Bosnia and Kosovo to that long list.

I feel we should add Rwanda, Bosnia and Kosovo to that long list.

And Iraq. How many resolutions?

Not all Muslims have to be hostile to other religions for what I say to be true, yet a very significant minority are. I can see why you are so willing to change the subject and talk about Israel, having to defend, excuse or ignore nihilistic chauvinists who blow up "sinful" manifestations of westernism like nightclubs in Bali or who beat up women who go outside without a male escort or without wearing purda cannot be an easy task.

And the Slippery Slope starts... "If you criticize Israel in any way, you're a NeoNazi Islamist who wants all Jews dead." Like I said in another post, the patriarchal chauvinism is a cultural rather than religious problem. I could simply point out how most Christian religions are loathe to have females in a clergical position and how women were regarded as property in the days of old, but you'd dismiss as the past nevermind how Traditional Family Values™ that the Religious Right pushes for involves women being subservient to males.

And again with the double standards. If Timothy McVeigh or Eric Rudolph blows shit up, they were lone nutters who don't represent Christianity but if Al Qaeda bombs Bali nightclubs it was The Global Islamic Borg Collective that was responsible so if they don't all apologize they all wanted it to happen. "Defend, excuse or ignore" implies that they're anything but scum- but hey, assume all you like buddy. You probably assume I think PETA's the same as the Humane Society too.

:rolleyes:

Who was blocking the resolution by Japan calling for sanctions against North Korea? Who has been blocking action against Iran? Who had done anything about Somilia and Dafur? Don't blame all the UN inaction on the US. You know better than to do that.
Sanctions against North Korea would only hurt an oppressed people. Their leaders don’t care about the people.
Iran has done nothing deserving of sanctions.
The UN didn’t have the muscle to interfere in Dafur, because the US refuses to back it.

If war does come to the United States, I hope we can see through the lies and Japan and Israel will be held accountable. And the neocons too, for leaving us so unprepared for a real conflict.

To be fair, the UN have quite a difficult job. It's not as if they can just introduce crippling sanctions (as that tends to kill the innocent more than the guilty) nor can they just requisition a million or so troops and occupy a country. Even if they did have a million troops who were signed up and willing to die for another nation than their own does anyone here still think that occupation is a panacea to really serious problems? Perhaps they could simply arbitrarily decide who is and isn't guilty and send special forces to assassinate them...in their thousands...or perhaps they could simply declare that any breaking of any law will be met by instant nuclear annihilation? Maybe total occupation and the installation of a government on the offending countries in question?

What would people have them do?

Seriously, do people expect the UN to be able to wave a magic wand and fix everything? The UN is a forum, not a god. As a forum it is incredibly valuable and it does wield some power, just very subtly.

However, I would suspect that further debate on this should have its own thread.

No it didn't. The Rwandan Massacre did. The holocaust is almost a sideshow to such a horrible event that happened almost overnight.


Seriously, they were both horrible events, I don't know why you feel the need to compare which was worse or more evil. But the Holcaust was a death machine and the systematic slaughter of Europes Jews was undertaken on a much larger scale and in a much more sophisticated and factory-like way. Ask the UN how they let Rwanda happen, especially while they are giving the most aid to those poor Palestinians.

I don't agree with that exactly, though I do agree that the Holocaust is worth remembering for other reasons.

The holocaust did not occur because people were apathetic. The holocaust occurred because of a national and ethnic superiority complex and the need for a scapegoat. It was not until well into the war that the concentration of the Jewish people began and it occurred within a people that were not idle but brainwashed by the message of personal pride and the charisma of the National Socialists.

The biggest warning it can give us today is to be very wary of that which claims that a single group of people, whether we are a part of them or not, is either superior or inferior to any other, and I think everyone involved in the world today could do with bearing that in mind.

The Holocaust didn't happen over night. It happened after a decade of discrimination and apathy towards the anti-Semetic laws on behalf of the German people and the rest of the world. The physical concentration of the Jews and systematic slaughter didn't happen till a little into the war, or atleast the mass deportations didn't, but the Nuremberg Laws came into effective in the early 30s so the seeds were already sewn there. You're trivializing the Holocaust right now by trying to say that it was an act not directly specifically towards the Jews. Mein Kampf was written way before Hitler actually took power.

And again with the double standards. If Timothy McVeigh or Eric Rudolph blows shit up, they were lone nutters who don't represent Christianity but if Al Qaeda bombs Bali nightclubs it was The Global Islamic ...SNIP..

McVeigh and Rudolph were home grown terrorists. I have no idea what McVeigh’s religious convictions were but for the sake of argument let's say he was a Christian fundamentalist like Rudolph. So, we have two incidents.

Let's look at how many incidents there were that were done by radical Islamic terrorists....

No double standard there, none at all.

And as far as PETA goes, if they aren’t terrorists they darn well border on it.

. Ask the UN how they let Rwanda happen.
You should read Shake Hands with the Devil by Lt. Gen. Romeo Dallaire
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0786714875/002-9271112-8608047?v=glance&n=283155

The obvious sarcasm alluded you?

It is more like a "we don't give a shit attitude".

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1821462,00.html

Ugh, the "Guardian".:rolleyes:

The Holocaust didn't happen over night. It happened after a decade of discrimination and apathy towards the anti-Semetic laws on behalf of the German people and the rest of the world. The physical concentration of the Jews and systematic slaughter didn't happen till a little into the war, or atleast the mass deportations didn't, but the Nuremberg Laws came into effective in the early 30s so the seeds were already sewn there. You're trivializing the Holocaust right now by trying to say that it was an act not directly specifically towards the Jews. Mein Kampf was written way before Hitler actually took power.
So there was some anti-Jewish sentiment in existence prior to World War 2. That doesn't implicate the entire of the US and the Allied powers in the actual holocaust any more than being averse to the patriarchal and oppresive nature of Islam implicates me personally in the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse.

I stand by my former point.

The UN didn’t have the muscle to interfere in Dafur, because the US refuses to back it.

Why doesn't the UN have the muscle to interfere in Dafur without the US? Why does it always fall on the USA to do something? Are the rest of the countries in the world that impotent? I think not.

The US didn't refuse to back action in Dafur, but to expect the US to do something...I do think we are a little bit busy elsewhere along with Great Britain. What the hell is wrong with Russia, China, etc, etc.

However, I would suspect that further debate on this should have its own thread.

It has had it's own threads but you are welcome to start another one if you like. You are right, it is a bit off topic.

Why doesn't the UN have the muscle to interfere in Dafur without the US? Why does it always fall on the USA to do something? Are the rest of the countries in the world that impotent? I think not.

That little thing called a 'veto' that crops its ugly head from time to time.

The US didn't refuse to back action in Dafur, but to expect the US to do something...I do think we are a little bit busy elsewhere along with Great Britain. What the hell is wrong with Russia, China, etc, etc.
I don't think the US should be blamed for African crises. Its not traditionally their sphere of influence.

The onus should fall on the ex-colonials: Mainly the UK, but also France (like it is doing in Cote d'Ivoire) and other ex colonial powers.

So there was some anti-Jewish sentiment in existence prior to World War 2. That doesn't implicate the entire of the US and the Allied powers in the actual holocaust any more than being averse to the patriarchal and oppresive nature of Islam implicates me personally in the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse.

I stand by my former point.

The U.S. and the Allied powers while not taking an active role in the Holocaust did however KNOW ABOUT THE CAMPS. Roosevelt knew about Auschwitz and the train tracks that led there and all its evil... but did nothing to stop it. All Roosevelt had to do was bomb the tracks leading to Auschwitz and he would have saved many many Jews.

And as far as PETA goes, if they aren’t terrorists they darn well border on it.
Looks like we agree there.
Why doesn't the UN have the muscle to interfere in Dafur without the US? Why does it always fall on the USA to do something? Are the rest of the countries in the world that impotent? I think not.
Have the military spending in the world in spent by the US, and we squander it.
The US didn't refuse to back action in Dafur, but to expect the US to do something...I do think we are a little bit busy elsewhere along with Great Britain. What the hell is wrong with Russia, China, etc, etc.
Yes, we were busy being warmongers, precisely the attitude I hope the coming conflicts correct. Russia is corrupt, and as for China, it's uncivilized.

The U.S. and the Allied powers while not taking an active role in the Holocaust did however KNOW ABOUT THE CAMPS. Roosevelt knew about Auschwitz and the train tracks that led there and all its evil... but did nothing to stop it. All Roosevelt had to do was bomb the tracks leading to Auschwitz and he would have saved many many Jews.
He was too busy destroying Dresden. It is interesting that every other piece of information that could have possibly been used as propaganda was, except for that. FDR really was an anti-Semitic bastard.

The U.S. and the Allied powers while not taking an active role in the Holocaust did however KNOW ABOUT THE CAMPS. Roosevelt knew about Auschwitz and the train tracks that led there and all its evil... but did nothing to stop it. All Roosevelt had to do was bomb the tracks leading to Auschwitz and he would have saved many many Jews.
I've never heard of that, but I seriously doubt taking out the train tracks would have saved those people's lives. Deaths occurred in more places than a single camp, and when a group is determined to kill, location matters not a jot.

The only way to bring the holocaust to an end was a direct liberation of the camps and the removal of the Nazis as quickly as possible, and you can be sure that the Allied forces did everything they could to get to that stage as quickly as possible whether or not they knew of the atrocities that were going on there.

Quite why you would suspect otherwise is beyond me.

I've never heard of that, but I seriously doubt taking out the train tracks would have saved those people's lives. Deaths occurred in more places than a single camp, and when a group is determined to kill, location matters not a jot.

The only way to bring the holocaust to an end was a direct liberation of the camps and the removal of the Nazis as quickly as possible, and you can be sure that the Allied forces did everything they could to get to that stage as quickly as possible whether or not they knew of the atrocities that were going on there.

Quite why you would suspect otherwise is beyond me.


When I said Auschwitz I was also alluding to the dozens of other concentration camps, sorry for not being specific. While bombing the tracks leading to all these camps woudn't have saved everyone, it would have severely decreased the capabilities of nazi mass murder.

When I said Auschwitz I was also alluding to the dozens of other concentration camps, sorry for not being specific. While bombing the tracks leading to all these camps woudn't have saved everyone, it would have severely decreased the capabilities of nazi mass murder.

Not really. They would have just gone back to doing it in the ghettos, like Warsaw.

And of course this is all on the premise that the war had anything to do with saving the Jews.

Not really. They would have just gone back to doing it in the ghettos, like Warsaw.

And of course this is all on the premise that the war had anything to do with saving the Jews.

The war had nothing to do with saving the jews .

The war had nothing to do with saving the jews .
Really?

And Iraq. How many resolutions?

17 at last check.

I'm sorry I have no root font of this article, I took it from http://www.losgenoveses.net/foro/viewtopic.php?t=26713&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=12

Robert Fisk: From my home, I saw what the 'war on terror' meant
Published: 14 July 2006

All night I heard the jets, whispering high above the Mediterranean. It lasted for hours, little fireflies that were watching Beirut, waiting for dawn perhaps, because it was then that they descended.
They came first to the little village of Dweir near Nabatiya in southern Lebanon where an Israeli plane dropped a bomb on to the home of a Shia Muslim cleric. He was killed. So was his wife. So were eight of his children. One was decapitated. All they could find of a baby was its head and torso which a young villager brandished in fury in front of the cameras. Then the planes visited another home in Dweir and disposed of a family of seven.

It was a brisk start to Day Two of Israel's latest "war on terror", a conflict that uses some of the same language - and a few of the same lies - as George Bush's larger "war on terror". For just as we "degraded" Iraq - in 1991 as well as 2003 - so yesterday it was Lebanon's turn to be "degraded".

That means not only physical death but economic death and it arrived at Beirut's gleaming new £300m international airport just before 6am as passengers prepared to board flights to London and Paris.
From my home, I heard the F-16 which suddenly appeared over the newest runway and fired a spread of rockets into it, ripping up 20 metres of tarmac and blasting tons of concrete into the air in a massive explosion before a Hetz-class Israeli gunboat fired on to the other runways.
Two of Middle East Airlines' new Airbuses were left untouched but, within minutes, the airport was deserted as passengers fled back to their homes and hotels.

The flight indicators told the whole story: Paris no flight, London, no flight, Cairo, no flight, Dubai, no flight, Baghdad - from the cauldron into the fire if anyone had chosen to take it - no flight. Someone was playing "Don't Cry For Me, Argentina" over the public address system.
Then the Israelis went for the Hizbollah television station, Al-Manar, clipping off its antenna with a missile but failing to put the station off air. That might be a more understandable target - "Manar", after all, broadcasts Hizbollah propaganda. But was it really designed to find or recover the two Israeli soldiers captured on Wednesday? Or to take revenge for the nine Israelis killed in the same incident, one of the blackest days in recent Israeli Army history although not as black as it was for the 36 Lebanese civilians killed in the previous 24 hours.
An Israeli woman was also killed by a Hizbollah rocket fired into Israel. So, in the grim exchange rate of these wretched conflicts, one Israeli death equals just over three Lebanese; it's a fair bet the exchange rate will grow more murderous.

And by afternoon, the threats had grown worse. Israel would not "sit idly by". It ordered the entire population of the southern suburbs - home to Hizbollah's headquarters - to flee their homes by 3pm.
Save for a few hundred families, they stubbornly refused to leave. Everywhere in Lebanon could now be a target, the Israelis announced. If Israel bombed the suburbs, the Hizbollah roared, it would fire its long-range Katyushas at the Israeli city of Haifa. One of them had apparently already damaged an Israeli air base at Miron, a fact concealed at the time by Israeli censors.

It certainly frightened Lebanon's Gulf tourists who packed the roads from Bhamdoun in their 4x4s, fleeing for the safety of Syria and flights home from Damascus. Another little economic death for Lebanon.
But what did all this mean, this ranting and threatening? I sat at home in the early afternoon, going through my files of Israeli statements. It turned out that Israel had threatened not to "sit idly by" (or occasionally "stand idly by") in Lebanon on at least six occasions in the past 26 years, most famously when the late Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin promised that he would not "stand idly by" while Christians were threatened here in 1980 - only to withdraw his soldiers and leave the Christians to their bloody fate three years later.
The Lebanese are always left to their fate. Israel's Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, says he holds the Lebanese government responsible for the attacks on the border that breached the international frontier on Wednesday.

But Mr Olmert and everyone knows that the weak and fractious government of the Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora isn't capable of controlling a single militiaman, let alone the Hizbollah.
Yet wasn't this the same set of Lebanese political leaders congratulated by the United States last year for its democratic elections and its freedom from Syria? Indeed, a man who sees Bush as a friend - perhaps "saw" is a better word - is Saad Hariri, son of the ex-Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri who built much of the infrastructure that Israel is now destroying and whose murder last year - by Syrian agents? - supposedly outraged Mr Bush.

Yesterday morning, Saad Hariri, the son, was flying into Beirut when America's Israeli allies arrived to bomb the airport. He had to turn round as his aircraft skulked off to Cyprus for refuge.
But it was the undercurrent of terror-speak that was particularly frightening yesterday.

Lebanon was an "axis of terror", Israel was "fighting terror on all fronts". During the morning, I had to cut across an interview with an Australian radio station when an Israeli reporter stated - totally untruthfully - that there were Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Lebanon and that not all Syria's troops had left.

And the reason why the Israelis had attacked Beirut's infinitely secure and carefully monitored airport, used by diplomats and European leaders, a facility as safe as any in Europe? Because, so said the Israelis, it was "a central hub for the transfer of weapons and supplies to the Hizbollah terrorist organisation." If the Israelis really want to know where that hub is, they should be looking at Damascus airport. But they do know that, don't they?

And so it is terror, terror, terror again and Lebanon is once more to be depicted as the mythic terror centre of the Middle East along, I suppose with Gaza. And the West Bank. And Syria. And, of course, Iraq. And Iran. And Afghanistan. And who knows where next?

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/060710fa_fact

Nice opinion piece.

And the Slippery Slope starts... "If you criticize Israel in any way, you're a NeoNazi Islamist who wants all Jews dead." Like I said in another post, the patriarchal chauvinism is a cultural rather than religious problem. I could simply point out how most Christian religions are loathe to have females in a clergical position and how women were regarded as property in the days of old, but you'd dismiss as the past nevermind how Traditional Family Values™ that the Religious Right pushes for involves women being subservient to males.

And again with the double standards. If Timothy McVeigh or Eric Rudolph blows shit up, they were lone nutters who don't represent Christianity but if Al Qaeda bombs Bali nightclubs it was The Global Islamic Borg Collective that was responsible so if they don't all apologize they all wanted it to happen. "Defend, excuse or ignore" implies that they're anything but scum- but hey, assume all you like buddy. You probably assume I think PETA's the same as the Humane Society too.

:rolleyes:

Actually I didn't say that, what I said was rather than maintain focus on the issue under discussion - the relative degrees of tolerance within Islamic and Western nations you decided to shift focus and go on a mini rant about Israel despite its total irrelevance.

I do not in any way support the agenda of the NCR although I fail to see how pushing for a constitutional amendment to outlaw gay marriage is as extreme as making homosexuality punishable by death - as is the case in a number of Middle Eastern states. So lets try not to morally equivocate preventing these people from getting married with burying them up to the neck and then throwing rocks at their head until they die.

There are deep and profound problems with the manner in which Islam has manifested itself to date and I do not believe that these problems can be dismissed as the activities of lone nutters particularly when many of the most extreme practices of the religion are carried out by state governments. This is not to say that all Muslims are responsible for the likes of Bali, far from it, but right now Islamic moderates need to do a hell of a lot more to put their own house in order.

I'm pretty sure everyone was complaining when the US attacked Alqaeda globally, screaming and whining "Oh noes! The evil US-bushitler throngs are murdering the kumbayaist peaceloving Alqaeda! Bad USIAN! Bad!"

If Israel has the will to drive Hamas and Hezbollah out of the region, things will be better for the Palestininians, Lebanese, and Israelis.

On the line of the Fisk column: http://lot.lacucalbina.org/wp-content/upload/thumb-rajoy_mini.jpg

"You all are the enemy". :rolleyes:

Why doesn't the UN have the muscle to interfere in Dafur without the US? Why does it always fall on the USA to do something? Are the rest of the countries in the world that impotent? I think not.

The US didn't refuse to back action in Dafur, but to expect the US to do something...I do think we are a little bit busy elsewhere along with Great Britain. What the hell is wrong with Russia, China, etc, etc.

I think part of the problem is that whenever an increase in the military budget is proposed within the UK or most other leading European nations, a significant chunk of the mainstream media recoil with such horror that prejudices any further debate. Plus you'll always get at least one plonker that will say: "In this day and age we must pursue peace rather than simply finding new ways to make war" - or some other logically stunted motto.

China and Russia couldn't care less about human rights abuses in their own country never mind when it happens overseas. They're quite happy to see an impenetrable blanket of sovereignty fall across every nation round the globe under which even the most horrific of violations can be removed from international oversight under the grounds that it is an internal affair.

Lebanon was an "axis of terror", Israel was "fighting terror on all fronts". During the morning, I had to cut across an interview with an Australian radio station when an Israeli reporter stated - totally untruthfully - that there were Iranian Revolutionary Guards in Lebanon and that not all Syria's troops had left.

The funny thing is there are Iranian troops in Lebanon. No joke...the IDF spotted Iranian revolutionary guards helping Hezbollah aim missiles at the Israeli warship hit by, you guessed it, Iranian missiles...this guy needs to learn what constitutes a truth, and while he's at it, an argument.

Saying that life is miserable for some people in Lebanon doesn't make Israel the Big Bad. And I've answered this argument on another thread; I don't feel like copy/pasting or repeating myself here.

On the same line: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vweoY1WWTAs&search=ska-p
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3e_SQ9D2YMY&search=ska-p


*WARNING* Adult content: Abu Ghraib and Bush & Rice images.

The funny thing is there are Iranian troops in Lebanon. No joke...the IDF spotted Iranian revolutionary guards helping Hezbollah aim missiles at the Israeli warship hit by, you guessed it, Iranian missiles...this guy needs to learn what constitutes a truth, and while he's at it, an argument.

First of all, all these people are experienced in finding people and portable laboratories of MDW that weren't there neither before or later, so if there had to be iranian soldiers, there were... but casually the israeli troops didn't shoot those Hezbollah soldiers who were shooting at them, so nobody got wounded and we have no phisical proofs of the iranian help...

And the missiles that Iran uses are of Russian procedence.

Actually I didn't say that, what I said was rather than maintain focus on the issue under discussion - the relative degrees of tolerance within Islamic and Western nations you decided to shift focus and go on a mini rant about Israel despite its total irrelevance.

It's quite relevant considering Israel is just a few rules short of openly practicing apartheid against Gentiles- especially Muslims. The fact that every Palestinian is assumed to be a suicide bomber or insurgent and is treated as such until proven otherwise (sometimes postmortem, I wouldn't be surprised). Not to mention the blockades that have crippled the Palestinian economy. The whole "It'll stop when the Palestinians crack down on the terrorists" is honesly a disingenuous Catch-22 bullshit the likes of which have crippled No Child Left Behind and the United Nations: They're all expectations made unrealistic by the lack of support and sometimes the deliberate undermining of efforts to make them work as supposed. Even with the bastard Arafat long dead, Israel constantly undermines the Palestinians' authority amongst their own people while expecting them to keep the intifadah under control.

Do you think Abbas would just sit on his ass and let HAMAS have a field day if he could pay all the government employees their months overdue salary, organize security more effectively and not worry about Israel blowing the shit out of whoever they like and thus piss off the locals into sympathizing or joining the insurgents?

I do not in any way support the agenda of the NCR although I fail to see how pushing for a constitutional amendment to outlaw gay marriage is as extreme as making homosexuality punishable by death - as is the case in a number of Middle Eastern states. So lets try not to morally equivocate preventing these people from getting married with burying them up to the neck and then throwing rocks at their head until they die.

So you're saying an oppressive rule of law is a lot more acceptable than the same intolerance carried out to the fatal extreme? Then I suppose you'd be Two Thumbs Up with the Jim Crow Laws as long as they didn't explicitly call for blacks to be lynched. The United States is still strong in terms of Federal authority, otherwise there'd probably be a few states who'd feel fine and dandy about making Fag Smashing the State Sponsored Sport or at least look the other way when it happens.

There are deep and profound problems with the manner in which Islam has manifested itself to date and I do not believe that these problems can be dismissed as the activities of lone nutters particularly when many of the most extreme practices of the religion are carried out by state governments. This is not to say that all Muslims are responsible for the likes of Bali, far from it, but right now Islamic moderates need to do a hell of a lot more to put their own house in order.

The nutters in Islam are seldom lone. If anything, they tend to organize in packs, centered around a charismatic figure- whether it be a firebrand imam or a terrorist mastermind like Bin Ladin. Even then they're a considerable sliver of the Islamic population as a whole; otherwise if most or all Muslims were terrorists like NS General loves to believe, it would be Hell on Earth with billions of people and nations- some modernized- that could be used as resource in a new Counter-Crusade.

First of all, all these people are experienced in finding people and portable laboratories of MDW that weren't there neither before or later, so if there had to be iranian soldiers, there were... but casually the israeli troops didn't shoot those Hezbollah soldiers who were shooting at them, so nobody got wounded and we have no phisical proofs of the iranian help...

Don't you just love unconfirmed rumors? Doesn't matter now really as the radar sites are now being bombed.

And the missiles that Iran uses are of Russian procedence.

Now I thought they were Chinese.

First of all, all these people are experienced in finding people and portable laboratories of MDW that weren't there neither before or later, so if there had to be iranian soldiers, there were... but casually the israeli troops didn't shoot those Hezbollah soldiers who were shooting at them, so nobody got wounded and we have no phisical proofs of the iranian help...
Read the links below.

And the missiles that Iran uses are of Russian procedence.
You're so wrong. (http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/breakingnews.php?id=109324)

More links:http://za.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-07-15T130158Z_01_ALL546893_RTRIDST_0_OZATP-MIDEAST-ISRAEL-SHIP-20060715.XML&archived=False

http://www.sqlspace.com/cnn-iranian-made-missiles-hit-israel-vt30523.html

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2195553

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/15/ap/world/mainD8ISG5FO3.shtml

Now I thought they were Chinese.

That's why I began the SUNBURN topic.

Read the links below.


You're so wrong. (http://www.bangkokpost.com/breaking_news/breakingnews.php?id=109324)

More links:http://za.today.reuters.com/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=topNews&storyID=2006-07-15T130158Z_01_ALL546893_RTRIDST_0_OZATP-MIDEAST-ISRAEL-SHIP-20060715.XML&archived=False

http://www.sqlspace.com/cnn-iranian-made-missiles-hit-israel-vt30523.html

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=2195553

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/15/ap/world/mainD8ISG5FO3.shtml:

That's why I began the SUNBURN topic.

Thats not answer...those links all indicate that Iranian troops assisted Hezbollah in firing homemade Iranian missiles into an Israeli warship and city. Your article is, in a word, bullshit.

Israel has launched a full scale war againts Lebanon and the Lebanese. All words are only alibis.


true...they have..but lets not forget that the lebanese governemtn allowed a terrorist organization to operate on its soil and attack israel. they had something coming...just not this. its the exact same thing the US did to afghanistan. same reason.

true...they have..but lets not forget that the lebanese governemtn allowed a terrorist organization to operate on its soil and attack israel. they had something coming...just not this. its the exact same thing the US did to afghanistan. same reason.

There's something I don't like about using the word "allowed." It implies that the Lebanese government has the resources required to clamp down on Hezbollah but did nothing about it. Much like No Child Left Behind, the United Nations, and the Palestinian government, it's all bullshit lip service and expectations without the real foundations to back that ass up. Hezbollah had free reign over Southern Lebanon since the Syrian withdrawal and frankly, the people in charge of the government don't care much for them and if they could have done something about it, they certainly wouldn't have waited for Israel to march right on in and do whatever the fuck it pleases to do so.

I concur. There have been many posts that unfortunately suggest that Muslims are "uncivilized", "savages", "ragheads", "scum", etc. The suggested cures for their unsuitablity (according to the posters) is to turn their countries into large parking lots, glass, or in one extreme case, it was suggested that Muslim males be sterilized to eventually remove them from the gene pool.

While I am ticked off by both sides in this current dispute, I am especially ticked at the Israelis. They are freewheeling right now due to their obvious military superiority, and unfortunately they are killing far too many civilians and exploiting the recent withdrawal of Syrian troops from Lebanon.

Terrorism is indeed alive and well in the Middle East. :(

What is even more interesting is that while it is easy to point fingers and blame entire populations and groups for the activities of fanatics (and therefore do their jobs for them by creating even more dissention and hatred), the rest of the world conveniently forgets what history teaches us about the fanatics of other religions and political dispositions in the rest of the world. How many wars were fought and how many people killed in the name of Christianity, for example, or communism. Or, for that matter, democracy?
Let's face a few bits of reality. . .
1. The Middle East is only interesting to us because of oil. If they didn't have black gold under their sand they could just as easily be Darfur, killing off their own populations and their weak neighbors for all the rest of the West could care.
2. Israel gets US support because it is the only US friendly (and quite friendly considering the amount of money pumped into its economy by the US) nation in the region. Again, no oil... no cares.

Basically, it comes down to this. When you can call a human life "collateral damage" and sleep at night. You've degraded yourself and your society. This applies to all sides of any conflict. Every child has the potential to become a terrorist or a Ghandi, a Churchill, or a MLK. Every child also has the potential to become a terrorist, a hatemonger, and a fear spreader. With every scream of a terrified kid in the night as one shell after another is dropped in his or her neighborhood the foundations of a future are being laid. By both sides.
Soldiers and terrorists are created in fear, hunger, deprivation, and anger.
Again I say to you. Barbarians dismiss life with no regard, and all I see are uncivilized people on both sides with the inability to lead their people to safety through diplomacy and good judgement.

What is even more interesting is that while it is easy to point fingers and blame entire populations and groups for the activities of fanatics (and therefore do their jobs for them by creating even more dissention and hatred), the rest of the world conveniently forgets what history teaches us about the fanatics of other religions and political dispositions in the rest of the world. How many wars were fought and how many people killed in the name of Christianity, for example, or communism. Or, for that matter, democracy?
Let's face a few bits of reality. . .
1. The Middle East is only interesting to us because of oil. If they didn't have black gold under their sand they could just as easily be Darfur, killing off their own populations and their weak neighbors for all the rest of the West could care.
2. Israel gets US support because it is the only US friendly (and quite friendly considering the amount of money pumped into its economy by the US) nation in the region. Again, no oil... no cares.

Basically, it comes down to this. When you can call a human life "collateral damage" and sleep at night. You've degraded yourself and your society. This applies to all sides of any conflict. Every child has the potential to become a terrorist or a Ghandi, a Churchill, or a MLK. Every child also has the potential to become a terrorist, a hatemonger, and a fear spreader. With every scream of a terrified kid in the night as one shell after another is dropped in his or her neighborhood the foundations of a future are being laid. By both sides.
Soldiers and terrorists are created in fear, hunger, deprivation, and anger.
Again I say to you. Barbarians dismiss life with no regard, and all I see are uncivilized people on both sides with the inability to lead their people to safety through diplomacy and good judgement.
A standing ovation for your great post!! :)

Israel could bring more nations into this, it could start a World War III


:sniper: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :sniper: :sniper:

Dude, I dislike the USs' foreign policy as much as the next guy but if you think they are the first govt. to train and fund a terrorist organisation...No, they are not the first.

Israel could bring more nations into this, it could start a World War III


:sniper: :sniper: :mp5: :mp5: :sniper: :sniper:
Excellent example of a first post - stating the obvious, and gun smileys also.

Welcome to the forums.

What is even more interesting is that while it is easy to point fingers and blame entire populations and groups for the activities of fanatics (and therefore do their jobs for them by creating even more dissention and hatred), the rest of the world conveniently forgets what history teaches us about the fanatics of other religions and political dispositions in the rest of the world. How many wars were fought and how many people killed in the name of Christianity, for example, or communism. Or, for that matter, democracy?
Let's face a few bits of reality. . .
1. The Middle East is only interesting to us because of oil. If they didn't have black gold under their sand they could just as easily be Darfur, killing off their own populations and their weak neighbors for all the rest of the West could care.
2. Israel gets US support because it is the only US friendly (and quite friendly considering the amount of money pumped into its economy by the US) nation in the region. Again, no oil... no cares.

Basically, it comes down to this. When you can call a human life "collateral damage" and sleep at night. You've degraded yourself and your society. This applies to all sides of any conflict. Every child has the potential to become a terrorist or a Ghandi, a Churchill, or a MLK. Every child also has the potential to become a terrorist, a hatemonger, and a fear spreader. With every scream of a terrified kid in the night as one shell after another is dropped in his or her neighborhood the foundations of a future are being laid. By both sides.
Soldiers and terrorists are created in fear, hunger, deprivation, and anger.
Again I say to you. Barbarians dismiss life with no regard, and all I see are uncivilized people on both sides with the inability to lead their people to safety through diplomacy and good judgement.

I couldn't had said that better than you. I join the congratulations for such expressive words that represents the views of several people, not exactly extremists, in this forum over this issue. You should keep posting on this threads to see if we can hammer some civic sense on those radicals.

No, they are not the first.

But the biggest by far.

What is even more interesting is that while it is easy to point fingers and blame entire populations and groups for the activities of fanatics (and therefore do their jobs for them by creating even more dissention and hatred), the rest of the world conveniently forgets what history teaches us about the fanatics of other religions and political dispositions in the rest of the world. How many wars were fought and how many people killed in the name of Christianity, for example, or communism. Or, for that matter, democracy?
Let's face a few bits of reality. . .
1. The Middle East is only interesting to us because of oil. If they didn't have black gold under their sand they could just as easily be Darfur, killing off their own populations and their weak neighbors for all the rest of the West could care.
2. Israel gets US support because it is the only US friendly (and quite friendly considering the amount of money pumped into its economy by the US) nation in the region. Again, no oil... no cares.

Basically, it comes down to this. When you can call a human life "collateral damage" and sleep at night. You've degraded yourself and your society. This applies to all sides of any conflict. Every child has the potential to become a terrorist or a Ghandi, a Churchill, or a MLK. Every child also has the potential to become a terrorist, a hatemonger, and a fear spreader. With every scream of a terrified kid in the night as one shell after another is dropped in his or her neighborhood the foundations of a future are being laid. By both sides.
Soldiers and terrorists are created in fear, hunger, deprivation, and anger.
Again I say to you. Barbarians dismiss life with no regard, and all I see are uncivilized people on both sides with the inability to lead their people to safety through diplomacy and good judgement.

A well written piece, but then I find it is far easier to induce grandstanding ovations when making use of all inclusive generalisations, idealistic rhetoric, and abstract nouns that can be interpreted however one sees fit.

We can debate all we like about the meaning of the term civilisation, I will however say that whilst moral relativism seems to be all the rage these days, no 'civilised' person could possibly equivocate fighting for a persons right to elect their own government and fighting in order to subjugate those not complying to the requirements of radical Islamism.

Basically, it comes down to this. When you can call a human life "collateral damage" and sleep at night. You've degraded yourself and your society.

Sigged. And welcome to the madhouse BTW. You're probably too smart to last but I hope you can stick it.

Well actually that's a bit of a logical leap. I was merely saying that when you start to talk about jingoism and intolerance a good place to start would be by looking a nations that execute homosexuals and brutalise and degrade women, whose national discourse is punctuated with racism, who persecute Hindus, Jews, Christians, Atheists and the like and who seek to kill and destroy anyone or anything that does not conform to their tyrannical theocracy.

That would imply that people didn't know they were a back of bastards (and oddly enough, I've never heard a good word about Saudi from Muslim or christian). Nor does there seem to be any delusions with regard to North Korea, or China. There is however, a certain lingering belief that the US is a cuddly teddy bear with sweeties for all. Whatever about inside its borders, outside this would not be the case.

We can debate all we like about the meaning of the term civilisation, I will however say that whilst moral relativism seems to be all the rage these days, no 'civilised' person could possibly equivocate fighting for a persons right to elect their own government and fighting in order to subjugate those not complying to the requirements of radical Islamism.

I doubt there can be little debate that the deaths of children and the helpless in order to further political (both geographical and idealogical) designs can be considered reasonable. Putting people further at risk by destroying essential services such as electricity and sewer treatment creates more innocent victims. But, then as all good soldiers will say "the end justifies the means."
I am sorry that I disagree with this. I suspect most other people do as well. Do I believe there are causes worth dying for? Yes. Do I believe there are causes worth killing the innocent for? No. Do I believe shelling civilian centers will create peace? No. I don't care what side is what. The people who suffer most are the ones who always suffer most. Those who have no say, who have little say, or who must scratch a living out of the dirt and tiny markets that are given to them to live in.
Do I believe that esculating a war in the Middle East will create peace. Nope. In fact, I doubt any intelligence person who is following this "tragedy in the making" believes that this is going to create any kind of a peace.
What it will create is yet another generation of broken families, orphans, cripples, and poverty stricken anger filled people. Neighbors fighting with one another across 12 foot high chain link fences topped with barbed wire. No concern for one another's helpless. Only concern for land, oil, money, and power.
Diplomacy was the answer. Sharon had the sense to see it. Sadly, the one person who had the means and the ability to carry off peace in that pitiful region is gone.
Radicalism is always a matter of point of view. In this case, I believe all sides to be radicals who work to further their agendas at the cost of the very people they claim to represent.
Am I an idealist? Yes. In a world full of people who seek to minimize destruction with words like "collateral damage", to hide coffins from the media, or to shrug off the impact of what they do to the next generations... the world could use a few more idealists.

Sigged. And welcome to the madhouse BTW. You're probably too smart to last but I hope you can stick it.

It's a conversation that should be happening every where, not just here and I am only putting into words what most reasonable people are feeling.

Whilst not being overly concerned in regards to the ensueing humanitarian crisis in Lebanon, I do unequivocally endorse Israel in this regard.

We are, with the omission of the one poster, whose name escapes me, not from the middle east, or, more pertinently, Israel. To be surrounded by states all of whom maintain a professed and publicised intention to obliterate you, and be subject to a succession of suicide bombings, radically alters the collective psyche. Given the escalation in threat constituted by Iran, and the catalyst, or, indeed, pretext, of the kidnappings, Israel's conduct is entirely justifiable.

But what is the Israeli Government actually trying to achieve?

But what is the Israeli Government actually trying to achieve?

To my mind, a number of concerns:

- cow Iran
- effect the cessation of Hizbullah's attacks
- ensure the return of the hostages
- send a messageof sorts to its neighbours

However, I do fear it may be a pretext for an American invasion of Iran.

But what is the Israeli Government actually trying to achieve?

They are sending a message that they will not tolerate their troops being taken captured by terrorist organizations.

To my mind, a number of concerns:

- cow Iran
- effect the cessation of Hizbullah's attacks
- ensure the return of the hostages
- send a messageof sorts to its neighbours

However, I do fear it may be a pretext for an American invasion of Iran.

I think they got the "1 of us =100 of you" message a long time ago.

I think they got the "1 of us =100 of you" message a long time ago.

Perhaps.

It is damn funny though. I cannot wait to see Hizbullah attempt to defeat the Zionist division of the US army....

Perhaps.

It is damn funny though. I cannot wait to see Hizbullah attempt to defeat the Zionist division of the US army....

Usually I only find it amusing in hindsight. Currently I'm avoiding all radio and TV news.

- cow Iran
- effect the cessation of Hizbullah's attacks
- ensure the return of the hostages
- send a messageof sorts to its neighbours
However, I do fear it may be a pretext for an American invasion of Iran.

Cow Iran
Possible. I suspect that Iran feels fairly safe from Israel though (I am more than happy to be proved wrong, I am not an expert on Iran).

Effect the cessation of Hizbullah's attacks
Already addressed this. I fail to see any evidence to suggest that my conclusions are wrong on this one.

Ensure the safe return of the hostages.
This is mostly covered by my previous post. Israel is not applying any real pressure to Hizbollah.

Send a message of sorts to its neighbours.
Possibly. What message though? Why now? What strategy lies behind the message (whatever it is)?

I suspect that the US simply can't invade Israel without disengaging from other conflicts first. It would certainly create a lot of possibilities if the US started massing forces as if in preparation for an invasion.

So, what is Israel after?
Hmm, I think this warrants a new thread...

Usually I only find it amusing in hindsight. Currently I'm avoiding all radio and TV news.

Nah. I'm playing the thoroughly more amusing game; buy the Guardian, and the Telegraph, each day, and compare how they report the same news.....:D

Nah. I'm playing the thoroughly more amusing game; buy the Guardian, and the Telegraph, each day, and compare how they report the same news.....:D

Not the poxy Telegraph.......

Actually, the current civvy kill ratio is 6.875 to 1, israeli's winning, but i was expecting more.

Damn israelis! Can't do anything right, including massacrating civilians!

But this is freaky, seriously.. israel got two dead end choices:
- Escalate, and risk an all out conflict in the middle east. Though they would obviously win, they would lose alot too. A war is always stressful for a nation, no matter how godlike their army is.
- Retreat and... have the derka derka's claim a win. Of course, the arabs have already won, just look at demographics, its only a question of time before israel has more arabs than jews.

Cool isn't it?

Nah. I'm playing the thoroughly more amusing game; buy the Guardian, and the Telegraph, each day, and compare how they report the same news.....:D

I save time. Get the Times. It's not balanced either but it averages out between the Torygraph and the Guardian.

The really fun one is to get the Mail and the Independent (if they ever report the same news) and compare.

Cow Iran
Possible. I suspect that Iran feels fairly safe from Israel though (I am more than happy to be proved wrong, I am not an expert on Iran).

Effect the cessation of Hizbullah's attacks
Already addressed this. I fail to see any evidence to suggest that my conclusions are wrong on this one.

Ensure the safe return of the hostages.
This is mostly covered by my previous post. Israel is not applying any real pressure to Hizbollah.

Send a message of sorts to its neighbours.
Possibly. What message though? Why now? What strategy lies behind the message (whatever it is)?

I suspect that the US simply can't invade Israel without disengaging from other conflicts first. It would certainly create a lot of possibilities if the US started massing forces as if in preparation for an invasion.

So, what is Israel after?

I genuinely do not know. My feeling is simply that either the upper echelons of government have snapped, or that the action serves a purpose. I am inclined to believe the latter.

As for the motivation, the presence of the USA in Iraq is the only salient factor that renders the current situation unique from other situations wherein Israel has not acted.

I genuinely would not be shocked if Israel provoked Iran into a declaration of war to facilitate an American invasion.

Not the poxy Telegraph.......

Not nice. I'm currently applying to it for work experiance. I love the Telegraph.:)

I think part of the problem is that whenever an increase in the military budget is proposed within the UK or most other leading European nations, a significant chunk of the mainstream media recoil with such horror that prejudices any further debate. Plus you'll always get at least one plonker that will say: "In this day and age we must pursue peace rather than simply finding new ways to make war" - or some other logically stunted motto.

China and Russia couldn't care less about human rights abuses in their own country never mind when it happens overseas. They're quite happy to see an impenetrable blanket of sovereignty fall across every nation round the globe under which even the most horrific of violations can be removed from international oversight under the grounds that it is an internal affair.

Got it. The rest of the world doesn't give a damn so we will let America take care of it. If they don't we will condem them. If they do we will condem them. How utterly sad. :mad: