billiards Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 The racism is really very apparent. You need to be tuned into it, which is probably difficult if you are racist yourself. But if you look objectively at what is said, you can see repeatedly that one race is talked about as though they are an inferior sub-human species. With no right to a certain quality of life that we take for granted, that need to "have their guts blown out". That lowers the tone of the discussion. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Irbis Posted August 2, 2014 Author Share Posted August 2, 2014 <triple facepalm> Do you even know what race is? -1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 All that's needed is a little more of this... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 (edited) I don't see where a particular race is talked about as a sub-human species billiards. And maybe if someone was shooting rockets at your house you would express the wish that they die also. Whether they be the same race as you or not. I guess I don't see the racism as I'm a racist myself. I do know that you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about, and I would be calling you much worse if I didn't have respect for this forum's rules. Edited August 2, 2014 by MigL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 The thread title itself anchors the tone of the discussion. Perhaps if we focused less on the assignment of blame and more on the best, most practical, and peaceful path forward then progress could be made and fewer bodies added to the pile. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten oz Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 It is odd to me that so many people feel so strongly either way. Normally it is universally agreed that killing is a bad thing. it is also usually understood that the side doing the bulk of the killing abdicates the self defense argument. The world community with one voice should be focused on peace. Not finger pointing. Regardless of who is to blame we all should want the killing to stop. All of it. I admit that threats of rockets being fired at my home might influence the way I feel but I also understand such influence biases ones opinion. After 9/11 here in the states, with majority support of citizens, we went into Afghanistan. We were defending ourselves? What was accomplished? Is terrorism dead? Has support for terrorism weakened? Does anyone here honestly believe Israel weakens Hamas's position amongst Palestinians by blowing up schools, parks, and hospitals? Does anyone here honestly believe that elements of Hamas don't intentially instigate such violence? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 Agreed. Fighting back only breeds more terrorism as the casualties' relatives become committed to 'the cause'. What do you suggest as an alternative ? Or using the previous example .. What would YOU do if israel was YOUR house ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten oz Posted August 2, 2014 Share Posted August 2, 2014 Agreed. Fighting back only breeds more terrorism as the casualties' relatives become committed to 'the cause'. What do you suggest as an alternative ? If Israel called for a cease fire and declared that they would not attack Hamas position in Gaza regardless of what Hamas does. If Israel killed zero civilians, bombed zero Gaza locations, and continued to be attacked by Hamas I think it would shift world opinion. Israel would clearly be the peace seekers and Hamas clearly the terrorist villains. At that point any number of multi nation efforts could be implored because it would no longer be a tit for tat back and forth conflict. It would clearly be Hamas attempting to kill Israelis. It would clearly be terrorism. Stopping the Hamas attacks would be something everyone could get behind. Blowing up Hamas positions inst preventing attacks anyways. So it isn't as though Israel would be increasing the threat of attack by refusing to bomb facilities in Gaza. All local defense messures successfully be use now would still be in place. Or using the previous example .. What would YOU do if israel was YOUR house ? Thus far Israeli civilians have not been killed. Israeli has the strongest military in the Middle East and could turn Gaza into a crater if they so chose. So if I were there, in Israel, I would be comfortable with the govt giving a cease fire a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 The racism is really very apparent. You need to be tuned into it, which is probably difficult if you are racist yourself. But if you look objectively at what is said, you can see repeatedly that one race is talked about as though they are an inferior sub-human species. With no right to a certain quality of life that we take for granted, that need to "have their guts blown out". That lowers the tone of the discussion. Palestinian racism is really very apparent. Thus far Israeli civilians have not been killed. The out-of-date information. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Angel Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 Thus far Israeli civilians have not been killed. Wasn't it the murder of three young Israelis in the West Bank ( not Gaza) that triggered this current round of violence? If the Palestinean police force had been more successful or motivated in apprehending their killers this current round of violence most likely would not have occured. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 Palestinian racism is really very apparent. The out-of-date information. It's out of date, but it's still pretty nearly true compared to the number of civilian deaths on the other side. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) It's out of date, but it's still pretty nearly true compared to the number of civilian deaths on the other side. I am a citizen of Russia therefore I have some responsibility for Putin's crimes. Isn't it? I already buy more dear food. But I recognize that the sanctions are insufficient to stop war in the Europe.Maybe some Palestinians similarly think about Hamas. Therefore Israel should help to the people to win Hamas. Edited August 3, 2014 by DimaMazin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ten oz Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 Wasn't it the murder of three young Israelis in the West Bank ( not Gaza) that triggered this current round of violence? If the Palestinean police force had been more successful or motivated in apprehending their killers this current round of violence most likely would not have occured.I am not implying Israel is to blame. I believe Hamas is a terrorist organization. I understand that they (Hamas) want to wipe Israel off the map. My point was that long as Israel is killing Palistinians at a rate of something like 20-1 selling themselves as the good guys will be very difficult. If Israel could stop killing Palistinians for a sustained amount of the time and Hamas continued its aggression I think it would change the dialog. If Hamas was continiously attacking a passive responding Israel the clear solution in the global community would be to stop Hamas. Israel and its behavior good, bad, or neutral would be removed from the debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbrush Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) Agreed. Fighting back only breeds more terrorism as the casualties' relatives become committed to 'the cause'. What do you suggest as an alternative ? Or using the previous example .. What would YOU do if israel was YOUR house ? Whatever happened to high tech, surgical strikes? If the IDF can image combatants with infra red, they should be able to use a 20mm or 30mm round to take out individuals, from a drone. Israel is using artillary to take out targets, and artillary is not a surgical strike. The Israeli argument: "They are firing unguided rockets into our country and our ONLY way to stop it is to fire artillary at the general launch locations, and take out the WHOLE area, or blast a trail going there in tanks." Why does Israel need to destroy the tunnels? Maybe the tunnels can be monitored, flooded, or even booby trapped. At least install bugs and other detection devices concealed everywhere so the tunnels could not be used without the IDF knowing, then ambush the tunnellers when they attack. Edited August 3, 2014 by Airbrush Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 (edited) What happened to the other part of my post Ten oz... "What would YOU do if Israel was YOUR house'? If your neighbour was firing his shotgun indiscriminately at your house and your family, would you wait for condemnation from the rest of the neighbourhood or would you do something abou it ? Its a simple question with a very simple answer for most people and it has nothing to do with wether he actually kills any of your family or how many. And airbrush... A surgical strike on a hospital or school where Hamas hides their launchers is still a strike on a hospital or school. Drones don't fly into buildings. Edited August 3, 2014 by MigL 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 If your neighbour was firing his shotgun indiscriminately at your house and your family, would you wait for condemnation from the rest of the neighbourhood or would you do something abou it ? That might depend on what I had done to provoke him. If, for example, I had built a big wall round his house so he couldn't go out to work, I might consider that before opening fire- in particular I might not consider it fair to launch anti tank weapons at his house in retaliation for shotgun fire. And if I had the means to block that shot without significant risk to myself, I'd quite possibly realise that I didn't need to return fire- even with a shotgun. I also might think about moving a little further from his house- since my garden is big enough to let me picnic on the other side of it, out of range of the gun. Here's the real problem. He's shooting at me because of a feud started by our great great grandfathers. The shotgun isn't really going to do me a lot of harm. If I fire back I condemn my children and grandchildren to life in a war zone. If I stop, perhaps he will stop too (or at least I might get all the neighbours on my side) Maybe I'd not shoot back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbrush Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 And airbrush... A surgical strike on a hospital or school where Hamas hides their launchers is still a strike on a hospital or school. Drones don't fly into buildings. If the only way to neutralizing rocket launch sites is to explode the rockets, and there may be many rockets in once place located in hospitals and schools, then there is no way to avoid a huge explosion which will level the whole area. Is there a way to make rockets inoperable, without blowing them up? How about a focused electro magnetic pulse to cripple the electronics so the rockets cannot be launched? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiards Posted August 3, 2014 Share Posted August 3, 2014 I do know that you don't have a clue as to what you're talking about, and I would be calling you much worse if I didn't have respect for this forum's rules. You have absolutely no idea what I do/do not know. How immature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 That might depend on what I had done to provoke him. If, for example, I had built a big wall round his house so he couldn't go out to work, I might consider that before opening fire- in particular I might not consider it fair to launch anti tank weapons at his house in retaliation for shotgun fire. Are you calling terrorism by work? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiards Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 What happened to the other part of my post Ten oz... "What would YOU do if Israel was YOUR house'? If your neighbour was firing his shotgun indiscriminately at your house and your family, would you wait for condemnation from the rest of the neighbourhood or would you do something abou it ? Its a simple question with a very simple answer for most people and it has nothing to do with wether he actually kills any of your family or how many. Yes you/I/most people would do something. I personally would call the police. Perhaps in extreme situation, I might even shoot him (but I don't have a gun). However, I would not take out the water, power, homes, schools, hospitals and innocent lives of all his friends, family, and distant acquaintances. Anyway, the analogy fails on several levels to capture the complexity of the situation, as John has already pointed out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 Yes you/I/most people would do something. I personally would call the police. Perhaps in extreme situation, I might even shoot him (but I don't have a gun). However, I would not take out the water, power, homes, schools, hospitals and innocent lives of all his friends, family, and distant acquaintances. Anyway, the analogy fails on several levels to capture the complexity of the situation, as John has already pointed out. We can't consider your analogy because code of the analogy doesn't correspond a reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ophiolite Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 Who is to blame? Arguably Sir Arthur James Balfour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DimaMazin Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 Who is to blame? Arguably Sir Arthur James Balfour. Like Columbus at all conflicts in America. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Cuthber Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 (edited) Are you calling terrorism by work? No. I presume the question arises from your ignorance of Israel's behaviour. Does this help enlighten you>? "... restrictions on movement put in place by Israel since the Second Intifada are generally accepted as a major reason for the worsening of the Palestinian economy and as a reason for the increasing unemployment and poverty among Palestinians in the West Bank.[31] According to B'Tselem, tens of thousands of Palestinians lost employment in Israel as a direct result of the closure of the West Bank that Israel initiated at the start of the Second Intifada. Before the closure 110,000 Palestinians were employed in Israel and the settlements, which has been much reduced depending on the number of permits that Israel decides to issue to Palestinians.[31]" from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_freedom_of_movement Edited August 4, 2014 by John Cuthber Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted August 4, 2014 Share Posted August 4, 2014 As long as mistrust and revenge informs the thinking of either side then war is the inevitable consequence; trusting and forgiveness is the ONLY way to break the cycle. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now