Programs: Presidential Airways High Value Target, Catfish Air Flare, Hootch Honors Gold
Posts: 2,302
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhlyingRPh
The implication that everyone who rightly criticizes the most reactionary, racist and religiously bigoted government in the Middle East is antisemitic and wants Jews dead is extremely offensive, but on the other hand I think this is one of the tactics of hasbara. I don't know for sure, so perhaps someone can fill us in?
Two Points before the inevitable explosion:
1) I think this is probably at least a three way tie between Israel, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Though to be fair Israel is probably more tolerant than the KSA and probably a tad more tolerant than Iran depending on the particular issue. However all three governments are capable of extremely thuggish behavior. It's just whether or not it's your flavor of religion whether you support their right to be thuggish or not. Not really sure where Syria fits in as they're probably more secular than the other three, though a more despotic regime as well. Kuwaitis manage to be a bit despotic AND snotty as all hell, and most of the other Gulf states just pay off their loonies to buy another day or two of peace and interest on their money.
2) I have no idea what "hasbara" is.
I have no hatred of Israel in my heart at all, but no one involved is really even interested in peace. They all want some sort of Godly victory instead. If all Israelis and all Palestinians were all to suddenly become atheists this would all be over and done with in a matter of hours with a lasting peace and mostly open borders. It's not about "peace", it's about both sides thinking they have some pre-destined "right" to the land and we're not likely to ever see peace in the region as long as that emotional stalemate exists. /shrug
1) I think this is probably at least a three way tie between Israel, Iran and Saudi Arabia. Though to be fair Israel is probably more tolerant than the KSA and probably a tad more tolerant than Iran depending on the particular issue. However all three governments are capable of extremely thuggish behavior.
I think Saudi is vastly more intolerant than any other country in the Middle East. Iran's government may be hard line, but their people seem to be much different (and it had been one of the countries where things had been changing prior to the US calling them the axis of evil). Israel may be many things, but I don't believe they are any more intolerant than most Western nations.
Programs: UA 1K, IC RA, Marriott Silver, SPG Gold, ¤
Posts: 26,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dovster
"Return to 1967 borders"???? Isn't that a bit of a contradiction? It would have to be Israel, not the Palestinians, who returned to the 1967 borders.
Hamas, incidentally, has offered a 10 year truce in exchange for a state with the 1967 borders. That is one heck of a deal for Israel, isn't it?
In exchange for giving the Palestinians a state and withdrawing to the 1967 borders, Israel gets a full 10 years of not being attacked by the army which the new Palestinian state would be building.
Quote:
Originally Posted by euslaner
That's not land for peace. It's land for ???
I don't disagree. It's not necessarily a good deal (although at this point it may be worth a shot as little else has seemed to work). But I don't think these discusses are aided by posters posting misinformation. The fact is that Palestinian leadership has suggested that the 1967 borders are just fine with them. Whether or not Israel likes the conditions that come with this are another discussion, IMHO.
I have only one request of these posters: Stop the BS and say what you mean. Admit that you don't give a crap how many Palestinians are killed, what really upsets you is that not enough Jews are being murdered.
Interestingly enough, your belief that questioning Israel's actions amounts to antisemitism is not as uncommon as I had thought:
Location: In HNL for the last six weeks and seemingly forever
Programs: NW (DL?) Gold LH FTL, SPG Gold.
Posts: 6,584
Quote:
Dead Muslims: OK. Live Jews: No.
I don't get it: do you want more dead muslims? Less?
Or what about jews? I presume you want more of them alive... but perhaps more dead to even things out a little?
I really don't follow. Your thread smacks of outright bigotry. *We* don't talk about muslims killing each other... should we? Would that make you happy?
I don't get it. It seems pointless at best, and dangerously inflammatory at worst. You get a big
Perhaps it is time for you to grow up and face reality -- not live in the La La Land which you would like the world to be.
Oh, I am sorry, You are indeed right. The way Israel is doing it is making it oh so safe. Funny, I don't have a bomb bunker in my house here in la lal land, but your grown up world does.
Yeah, Israel's way is working just great. Enjoy the next air raid siren.
I would buy that if they weren't denouncing non-lethal steps (eg: the security wall and the sonic booms) that Israel takes. These kill no Arabs (indeed, as I mentioned earlier) actually save Arab lives -- but that doesn't matter. They also save Jewish lives and that is what the whole problem is.
They inconvenience the Palestinians.
It also comes down to them falling for the Palestinian PR.
Im not sticking my head in the sand. I am, however, saying that it is difficult to argue that US foreign policy in the middle east, or for that matter Cuba, has been productive for anyone over the last 50 years or so. If that is indeed true, I dont see the point in continuing either policy.
Until Russia stuck it's nose into the place we kept the Islamists out of power. That's success in my book.
Its clear from both of your comments that you just don't get it.
No, we are saying that making it about "good guys" versus "bad guys" is part of the problem. As long as you see Israelis as the good guys and Arabs or Palestinians as the bad guys, or vice versa, you will never have peace. The conservative mantra is to make it good versus evil. It it not. It is two sets of people, each with their own virtues and flaws.
Except the Palestinians are under the control of a great evil.
Quote:
No, you are simply restating conservative propaganda to paint the left view as extremist. We are saying that terrorism is a tactic that is used in absence of a military. We are not saying it is justifiable.
But that's not how the arguments come out.
Quote:
Wrong again on the "stick their head in the sand" comment. What we are saying is that both sides should make movements toward peace, and neither side should make moves that would specifically inhibit peace. The reason that Israel gets most of the attention is that Israel has most of the power.
You're supporting *MY* position here!
The Israelis have tried again and again towards peace. The result has always made things worse for them. How about some real effort from the Palestinians? There has been only one attempt from Fatah and it didn't last very long.
Quote:
So we should just accept all non-lethal actions without question? The main reason that the wall is such an issue is that a) it does not follow the 1967 borders, and b) it causes severe hardship to many Palestinian communities by unnecessarily restricting travel. And as for the sonic booms, is it really necessary to fly supersonically over Gazan airspace? What is exactly the purpose?
As for the wall--it prevents suicide bombers. If the Palestinians hadn't been using suicide bombers there would be no reason to build it or maintain it.
As for supersonic flights--photo recon at high speed is much safer.
Quote:
I think the primary flaw with the conservative philosophy is the unwillingness to even attempt to see things from someone else's point of view.
I'm willing to look. It's just I don't take their word for it, I look at their actions.
Incidentally, I get those same sonic booms over my house on a regular basis and they are in no way problematic.
A FYI to add to this:
Mythbusters took on the issue of sonic booms breaking windows. It turned out to be basically impossible. They didn't get any damage until the fighter was down at terrain-following altitudes and even then a less airtight building wouldn't have suffered damage--the window was blown out, not shattered.
But that's not what you said. You said they don't accept the 1967 borders. They do. It's just that you want them to accept those borders *and* recognize Israel's right to exist. Those are two separate issues.
Palestinian leadership has, more than once, offered to return to 1967 borders in exchange for a truce.
Yeah--a truce. A false peace they fully intend to break when they have brought in enough firepower.
If they really wanted peace they would have offered peace.
"Return to 1967 borders"???? Isn't that a bit of a contradiction? It would have to be Israel, not the Palestinians, who returned to the 1967 borders.
Hamas, incidentally, has offered a 10 year truce in exchange for a state with the 1967 borders. That is one heck of a deal for Israel, isn't it?
In exchange for giving the Palestinians a state and withdrawing to the 1967 borders, Israel gets a full 10 years of not being attacked by the army which the new Palestinian state would be building.
You're portraying it too good.
What they offered was no attacks *FROM HAMAS*. They specifically refused to do anything about attacks by anyone else operating in Hamas territory and yet would regard Israel going after these people as breaking the truce.
So, if I crank my stereo really loud, that saves lives? Really?
Dude, you are an old man, you don't have long on this earth. You really shouldn't spend your remaining years so bitter.
Do you stand on your porch and shout at kids playing their music too loud too?
A better example is deterring a thug by showing that you are armed.
