GENIUS FORUMS

Blondie wrote:

And who is going to pay to transport the whole country to Alaska? :-)
_________________
Kevin Solway

Duh. Israelis. I mean, like they can afford plane fare.

Part of your ignorance, Kevin. You think they are poor. If Israelis want to move, they can move. It is the rest of the middle east that cannot afford air fare or medicine or food.

Alaska would not be a bad place for the rich Israelis. Most things in Alaska are imported but Israelis could afford that. Alaska is oil rich and I reckon Israelis could out-wink the environmentalists and sell oil to the US from US territory.

No one would care because it would be an Israeli thing.

Ya'll act like ya'll never heard the idea of moving Israel out of the middle east. I wrote about that a year or two before and the Irani president suggested it about a year ago and he was called everything but white.

Faizi

Faizi wrote:

It is the rest of the middle east that cannot afford air fare or medicine or food.

Not true, of course. I was thinking of the Lebanese who are displaced by the current war and of Iraqi war victims. I was also thinking of some Syrians and the Sudanese.

Faizi

ksolway wrote:

How do you think the Israelis should respond to the thousands of missiles being fired at them?

Hezbollah took a couple of Israeli soldiers. If I remember correctly, something else of a kidnapping nature took place in Gaza. Israel retaliated first in Gaza. Then, turned its attention to Lebanon.

Thousands of missiles have not been fired at Israel and the quality of the rockets fired are not that great. Israel was the first to fire. Plus the air power. Hezbollah does not have such power.

The people of southern Lebanon and Beirut have suffered the most from this conflict. About a thousand civilian deaths so far. Nothing even romotely close to that number in Israel.

Faizi

I'm curious as to why you are so passionate and animated about this issue, Faizi.

Why does it mean so much to you? Do you think that if it is resolved, the world will be a better place, and nothing else will ever occur like it again?

James, you wrote:

You know really all we should be discussing is, What will Israel's strategy result in? There are unknowns in my mind about that question. Not much point discussing what has already occurred, letting us languish in the righteousness of our respective points of view.

This is utter rubbish, James. Two reasons: (1) Unknowns are really only unconclusions and speak of unreason (regardless of how hard it is for any given individual to reason something out), and; (2) There is no possible way you can discuss what Israel’s strategy will result in without discussing what has already occurred.

The problem with Israel's demolition strategy is that while it will decrease the capacity of the terrorist groups to obtain some style of WMD in the short term, it will lead to an enhanced desire to get same in the long term.

You really have that little faith in Western ideals such as ridding the world of WMD, implying that Israel is somehow crucial to implementing them? How so, James?

It's really quite painful watching you shoot yourself in the foot.

I guess they discount this, because as things have stood for some time, this would be bound to occur sometime in the future in any case.

Have you considered the notion that their current demolition project has nothing to do with preventing terrorist groups from obtaining WMD?

Although violence does so often lead to more violence, I don't necessarily think that they will encounter more 'ordinary' terrorism in the next ten years than what has been building up in recent years. There are always only so many people willing to die, and while the yanks have been in Iraq clearing the tables of the already trained and hardened fanatics over the last few years, and they are still there, it would seem like a good time to set up a more defendable perimeter by the use of a stronger than normal assault. Clearly from the strength of the continuing attacking capability of the Hezzies something was needed to cut them down to a manageable size.

Not even worth the second read.

.

Dan wrote:

Let's just give them Tasmania; doesn't seem to be much down there that we should worry about losing. We could charge them rent.

Bad idea, Dan. That would take the Muslim world’s attention off India and place it squarely in the hands of their mainland Victorian division, which would see rockets being launched over Bass Strait into Tassie; though the rent would be handy. And, then, you know what we’d see coming back to Victoria, don’t you?

.

drowden wrote:Let's just give them Tasmania;

That remark made me look up all the alternatives that have actually seriously been offered in the past.

Madagascar - debated in Germany since 1885, but the Polish government researched the idea starting from 1926, and the Nazis propped it up around 1938. The difficulties with the War might have prevented this plan from being further developed.

Uganda - suggestion by the Brits in 1902. Quite a debated idea also among the Jews. Some actually settled there.

Japan - A weird Japanese plan to get Jews to move over there to get more economical influence in the US and to stimulate their own economy. Some did migrate and survived the holocaust this way.

Canada, Australia and Iraq have been proposed as well in the past. Iraq would have been not a bad choice, come to think of it. Didn't Abraham come from around there orginialy? Ur was somewhere around Baghdad. I don't think Iraq could have been more messed up in the 20th century as it was. The Jews might have turned it into a thriving trading nation or at least mixed well with the Kurds, a similar people.

Trivia: The Alaska option has been used in a fictional book by Michael Chabon, apparently initialy an idea stated by Roosevelt

I found a statement from Christopher Hitchens, a known "neoconservative" journalist: "[T]he secular Jews of Israel should all move here to the United States, shucking off the madness of sacred lands once and for all. Israel will probably always be a beleaguered place, and as far as I can see, a thinking person should forsake it utterly."

A source for some of this: http://www.nickdenton.org/yisroel.htm

prince wrote:I'm curious as to why you are so passionate and animated about this issue, Faizi.

Why does it mean so much to you? Do you think that if it is resolved, the world will be a better place, and nothing else will ever occur like it again?

Contrary-wise, prince, is the judaic insistence on the continuation of a multi-century old mythological ethnic tribalist nationalism making the world peaceful?

Diebert,

I'm almost certain Brazil belongs on that list as well.

Leyla Shen wrote:Dan wrote:

Let's just give them Tasmania; doesn't seem to be much down there that we should worry about losing. We could charge them rent.

Bad idea, Dan. That would take the Muslim world’s attention off India

Hah. Yeah, India is a real target for Islamic interest. I have no idea why Kevin mentioned India. Sure, they and Pakistan have certain border issues, but so what? And what "Muslims" are we talking about anyway? Middle-eastern Muslims? Why would they give a damn about India? Hell, most of the oil rich mid-east Muslim nations (i.e. Saudi-Arab-Emirates) don't even bother using their immense oil wealth to become highly militarised, let alone make hugely threatening noises towards Israel. I wonder why that might be? Oh, I know! They don't actually share a border with Israel. Funny how much difference that actually makes. Plus Egypt and Jordan are two states who have formal relations with Israel, and Saudi Arabia has trade relations with them (actually, that might be Qatar, I can't quite recall). Their interest in Israel is more to do with Arab solidarity and its political and cultural reality than anything else.

and place it squarely in the hands of their mainland Victorian division, which would see rockets being launched over Bass Strait into Tassie;

And that would be a bad thing because.....................?

though the rent would be handy.

It would, but they would no doubt find some Talmudic law wihich prevented them from paying rent to us lowly goyim.

And, then, you know what we’d see coming back to Victoria, don’t you?.

Kevin?


Dan Rowden

The following is a rather disturbing, but not necessarily rare story from last year. It's possible to draw conclusions either way as to whom it is that suffers under a seige mentality. However, Gaza is not Israeli territory. It is illegally occupied territory which makes this tale of woe troubling on a couple of different levels. Also, this incident cannot be dismissed as some isolated case because it involves a mentality that is far reaching:

The Guardian

Not guilty. The Israeli captain who put 17 bullets into a Palestinian schoolgirl

· Officer ignored warnings that teenager was terrified
· Defence says 'confirming the kill' standard practice

Chris McGreal in Jerusalem
Wednesday November 16, 2005
The Guardian

An Israeli army officer who fired the entire magazine of his automatic rifle into a 13-year-old Palestinian girl and then said he would have done the same even if she had been three years old was acquitted on all charges by a military court yesterday.

The soldier, who has only been identified as "Captain R", was charged with relatively minor offences for the killing of Iman al-Hams who was shot 17 times as she ventured near an Israeli army post near Rafah refugee camp in Gaza a year ago.

The manner of Iman's killing, and the revelation of a tape recording in which the captain is warned that she was just a child who was "scared to death", made the shooting one of the most controversial since the Palestinian intifada erupted five years ago even though hundreds of other children have also died.

After the verdict, Iman's father, Samir al-Hams, said the army never intended to hold the soldier accountable.

"They did not charge him with Iman's murder, only with small offences, and now they say he is innocent of those even though he shot my daughter so many times," he said. "This was the cold-blooded murder of a girl. The soldier murdered her once and the court has murdered her again. What is the message? They are telling their soldiers to kill Palestinian children."

The military court cleared the soldier of illegal use of his weapon, conduct unbecoming an officer and perverting the course of justice by asking soldiers under his command to alter their accounts of the incident.

Capt R's lawyers argued that the "confirmation of the kill" after a suspect is shot was a standard Israeli military practice to eliminate terrorist threats.

Following the verdict, Capt R burst into tears, turned to the public benches and said: "I told you I was innocent."

The army's official account said that Iman was shot for crossing into a security zone carrying her schoolbag which soldiers feared might contain a bomb. It is still not known why the girl ventured into the area but witnesses described her as at least 100 yards from the military post which was in any case well protected.

A recording of radio exchanges between Capt R and his troops obtained by Israeli television revealed that from the beginning soldiers identified Iman as a child.

In the recording, a soldier in a watchtower radioed a colleague in the army post's operations room and describes Iman as "a little girl" who was "scared to death". After soldiers first opened fire, she dropped her schoolbag which was then hit by several bullets establishing that it did not contain explosive. At that point she was no longer carrying the bag and, the tape revealed, was heading away from the army post when she was shot.

Although the military speculated that Iman might have been trying to "lure" the soldiers out of their base so they could be attacked by accomplices, Capt R made the decision to lead some of his troops into the open. Shortly afterwards he can be heard on the recording saying that he has shot the girl and, believing her dead, then "confirmed the kill".

"I and another soldier ... are going in a little nearer, forward, to confirm the kill ... Receive a situation report. We fired and killed her ... I also confirmed the kill. Over," he said.

Palestinian witnesses said they saw the captain shoot Iman twice in the head, walk away, turn back and fire a stream of bullets into her body.

On the tape, Capt R then "clarifies" to the soldiers under his command why he killed Iman: "This is commander. Anything that's mobile, that moves in the [security] zone, even if it's a three-year-old, needs to be killed."

At no point did the Israeli troops come under attack.

The prosecution case was damaged when a soldier who initially said he had seen Capt R point his weapon at the girl's body and open fire later told the court he had fabricated the story.

Capt R claimed that he had not fired the shots at the girl but near her. However, Dr Mohammed al-Hams, who inspected the child's body at Rafah hospital, counted numerous wounds. "She has at least 17 bullets in several parts of the body, all along the chest, hands, arms, legs," he told the Guardian shortly afterwards. "The bullets were large and shot from a close distance. The most serious injuries were to her head. She had three bullets in the head. One bullet was shot from the right side of the face beside the ear. It had a big impact on the whole face."

The army's initial investigation concluded that the captain had "not acted unethically". But after some of the soldiers under his command went to the Israeli press to give a different version, the military police launched a separate investigation after which he was charged.

Capt R claimed that the soldiers under his command were out to get him because they are Jewish and he is Druze.

The transcript:

The following is a recording of a three-way conversation that took place between a soldier in a watchtower, an army operations room and Capt R, who shot the girl

From the watchtower "It's a little girl. She's running defensively eastward." "Are we talking about a girl under the age of 10?" "A girl about 10, she's behind the embankment, scared to death." "I think that one of the positions took her out." "I and another soldier ... are going in a little nearer, forward, to confirm the kill ... Receive a situation report. We fired and killed her ... I also confirmed the kill. Over."

From the operations room "Are we talking about a girl under the age of 10?"

Watchtower "A girl about 10, she's behind the embankment, scared to death."

A few minutes later, Iman is shot from one of the army posts

Watchtower "I think that one of the positions took her out."

Captain R "I and another soldier ... are going in a little nearer, forward, to confirm the kill ... Receive a situation report. We fired and killed her ... I also confirmed the kill. Over."

Capt R then "clarifies" why he killed Iman

"This is commander. Anything that's mobile, that moves in the zone, even if it's a three-year-old, needs to be killed. Over."

Irrelevant emotionalism. Did you know Hezbollah runs effecient hospitals in southern Lebanon? The people love them and some owe them their lives.

It is war. War lifts all stones, and the insects crawl into the sunlight. It is not a Jewish thing, Dan. It is a human thing. The Israeli commander matches his opponents care for the children of Israel, intentionally or not. Children are often the first to die. They run the slowest and don't hide well.

Do you remember that one line in the brilliant Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket? Joker was riding shotgun in a helicopter gunship as the gunner was strafing the rice fields, full of villagers.

Joker: "How can you kill women and children?"
Gunner: "Easy. You just don't lead them so much."

War is hell. And Hell is the Paradise that many Muslims seek. 72 virgin whores is only a reward for those already corrutped.

Tharan wrote:Irrelevant emotionalism. Did you know Hezbollah runs effecient hospitals in southern Lebanon? The people love them and some owe them their lives.

It is war. War lifts all stones, and the insects crawl into the sunlight. It is not a Jewish thing, Dan. It is a human thing. The Israeli commander matches his opponents care for the children of Israel, intentionally or not. Children are often the first to die. They run the slowest and don't hide well.

Do you remember that one line in the brilliant Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket? Joker was riding shotgun in a helicopter gunship as the gunner was strafing the rice fields, full of villagers.

Joker: "How can you kill women and children?"
Gunner: "Easy. You just don't lead them so much."

War is hell. And Hell is the Paradise that many Muslims seek. 72 virgin whores is only a reward for those already corrutped.

And israelis are killing for what? A mythologically god granted ethnic homeland, to fulfill prophecy? Screw Olam Ha Ba.

Tharan wrote:Irrelevant emotionalism.

I rather doubt most Palestinians would see things that way. I rather doubt any sane person could.

Did you know Hezbollah runs effecient hospitals in southern Lebanon? The people love them and some owe them their lives.

Yes. I'm politically aware, thanks. Both Hamas and Hizbollah are complex organisations who do a great deal of infastructural and humanitarian work for their respective constituencies, along with having a fanatical arm of idiots who think random killings of people in Israel (some of them Palestinians) will actually achieve something.

It is war. War lifts all stones, and the insects crawl into the sunlight.

To call the 30 year occupation of the OTs and the attendant oppression of the Palestinians "war" is to employ a false coinage that only serves the interest of Israel.

It is not a Jewish thing, Dan. It is a human thing.

I'm well aware that stupidity and delusion are universal. However, it is a Jewish thing insofar as the "Jewish thing" now looms large in our own cultural mentality as well as being a very significant factor in American culture - at all levels. Anyone who thinks Israel is just a middle-eastern issue just doesn't get it.

The Israeli commander matches his opponents care for the children of Israel, intentionally or not.

In saying that you show that you are not really getting the bigger picture. It's not just what he did, it's the official line he embodies and the arrogance of an entire state system that is the real issue.

Children are often the first to die. They run the slowest and don't hide well.

Hmm, so we just gun them down needlessly because we can? I'm sorry, even the maddest of the mad suicide bombers aren't that bad. At least they have the decency to rid us of themselves.

Do you remember that one line in the brilliant Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket? Joker was riding shotgun in a helicopter gunship as the gunner was strafing the rice fields, full of villagers.

Joker: "How can you kill women and children?"
Gunner: "Easy. You just don't lead them so much."

You do know it was an anti-war film, right?

War is hell.

War is indeed. But you're employing that false coinage again. That girl was not shot in a war; an occupation is not a war.

And Hell is the Paradise that many Muslims seek. 72 virgin whores is only a reward for those already corrutped.

How many virgin whores does a 13 year old girl get? And what does she do with them once she gets them?


Dan Rowden

Prince,

I owe several replies here and I have not had much time to write lately. However, I think I can answer your question briefly.

Why does it mean so much to you? Do you think that if it is resolved, the world will be a better place, and nothing else will ever occur like it again?

My concern is that the war will escalate beyond a conflict between Hezbollah and Israel. No, I do not think that if it is resolved the world will be a better place and that nothing of the sort will happen again.

I also have a hard time understanding why Israel is allowed to keep pummeling Lebanon. Yes, I know that Hezbollah is continuing to lob rockets into northern Israel. But more than a thousand civilians have been killed in Lebanon while only about eighty killed in Israel. Isreal has bombarded Lebanon enough that eighty five percent of its bridges have been destroyed. This and other damage to the infrastructure makes it very difficult to get aid to people who are drinking bad water and eating spoiled food. Also, the aid groups must get clearance from the Isrealis before entering an area and they are often told that they cannot enter.

It is not that I am anti-Israeli or anti Jew. But it is hard for me to understand how protecting their country entails such slaughter of civilians to such a magnitude and such complete destruction of Lebanon. If it was the opposite -- say, if Iran was pummeling Israel the way that Lebanon is being pummeled, the US would have been in an uproar, to put it mildly.

I have no understanding of why it seems to be okay for Israel to do this.

While I am writing, I feel compelled to address the seventy two virgins crap. I am sick and tired of that phrase. I was a Muslim for several years and I never heard reference to that idea until 9/11. Yes, I am aware that it is in the Koran but there are plenty of stupid things in the Bible, too. My husband was a devout Muslim and he never spoke of going to Heaven and getting laid.

In fact, his idea of the afterlife was that he would have to face God alone and God would judge him. After that, his soul would have to serve a long time in Purgatory before being allowed into paradise or Heaven. His idea of Heaven was of a place of no suffering. That's it. No wild parties with seventy two virgins.

Faizi

Faizi wrote:

But it is hard for me to understand how protecting their country entails such slaughter of civilians to such a magnitude and such complete destruction of Lebanon.

After the jews were almost exterminated like termites in world war II, they don't take any crap off of anyone, this is their attitude.

Over 3 million jews were tortured and murdered in world war II, many families had to watch or even contribute in the murder and torture of family and friends, what type of effect do you think this has on the consciousness of jews?

This explains much of the guilt felt by the world and why Israel was established in the first place. It was man's feeble attempt to try to fix the problem.

The west favors jews because they perceive them as the little brother that needs to be taken care of from the bullys at school. This is why western weapons have been pouring into Israsel for decades.

There has always been a strong hatred of the race similar to the racist attitude towards blacks, women etc...

If someone kidnaps two of their military, they drop a missile on the leader's home in the middle of a populated city.

you need to understand the race's history to understand their present mindset.

This is what I found in Wikipedia. I have not had the free time to look elsewhere.

Among all Israeli Jews, 65% believe in God and 85% participate in a Passover seder.

I wonder why the great majority of Jews participate in Passover when sixty five percent only believe in God.

Faizi

I also found this that shows the percentage of agnostics and atheists in Israel to be much lower.

http://www.adherents.com/largecom/com_atheist.html

Faizi

Prince wrote:

you need to understand the race's history to understand their present mindset.

I would have to be completely stupid to not be aware of the history of the Jewish people. I know a lot of people are that stupid but with the possible exception of yourself, I don't think people of that low caliber of ignorance are writing here.

I have read several historys and accounts of the Jewish Holocaust of the twentieth century. I am well aware of the horror that was endured and the slaughter.

I know that is said to be the reason that Israel is so aggressive in their defense.

I still do not see any justification for what they are doing to Lebanon now.

I also realize that Jews have been subjected to racial prejudice like blacks and like Arabs and Pakistanis and Indians and Puerto Ricans and everybody else. I know exactly how that feels because when I was married to a Pakistani, I felt it on many occasions.

Walking down the street and a car passes -- "WHERE ARE THE SHISH KABOBS?!!"

Pretty funny. I mean, you try to have a sense of humor.

Another one -- "GIVE ME A BANANA -- YOU JUST GOT OFF THE BANANA BOAT!!"

Oh, ha ha.

More annoying was having doors shut in your face when you are trying to rent a house.

At school, my son has been ofen called JEW. This makes him fighting mad. Not because it insults him to be thought a Jew but the way it is hurled. When my daughter was still in school, she also had some encounters with people calling her Paki or Jew.

I am not ignorant, Prince. I have read extensively and I have a lot of experience living among multi-cultural populations. I have definitely educated myself about the Jewish holocaust and it was a heinous, disgusting -- no words for it -- thing.

But I do not think that is adequate reason for killing Lebanese civilians as Israel is doing now.

Faizi

Faizi wrote:

I am not ignorant, Prince.

The name is Cosmic Prostitute, I wouldn’t name myself something as girlie as Prince, Do you think I’m crazy?

Faizi wrote:

But I do not think that is adequate reason for killing Lebanese civilians as Israel is doing now.

You are getting moral/emotional over a series of events that you have no control over, there is nothing anybody can do to stop what is happening. You are powerless and when you see that you will be free.

All one can do is understand the psychological motivations on each side of the battlefield only as a means to prevent oneself from ever being caught in a similar predicament.

Psychological understanding is all there is. You need to see that you are allowing your emotions to control your thinking.

If you can fully understanding the motivations on each side then this will dispel your emotional conflict.

This is the nature of understanding.

This is why I presented you with the history of the Jews so that you can understand their brutality.

The jews will brually exterminate the Hezabollah/and anyone nearby because they have a deep fear of being exterminated themselves and historically one can see why this fear has taken root.

Are you able to observe "what is" without judgement? Both sides are confused and emotionally victimized groups of people, there is nothing to judge because they is no one that is choosing what they are doing, both sides are controlled by weak emotions.

The middle-east conflict is an inevitable series of events.

drowden wrote:

Tharan wrote:Irrelevant emotionalism.

I rather doubt most Palestinians would see things that way. I rather doubt any sane person could.

Let's clean this up of all the silly emotion. Fact: If Israel could choose a sterile war that killed no "civilians," they would do so. And yet here you are, like all the knee-jerk Europeans, whining about the Israelis and their tactics.

There is a recent cartoon that shows an Israeli soldier standing in front of a baby carriage shooting at a Hizbollah fighter standing behind a baby carriage as cover. I would add to this image, people such as yourself throwing rotten tomatoes at Israel.

Yes. I'm politically aware, thanks. Both Hamas and Hizbollah are complex organisations who do a great deal of infastructural and humanitarian work for their respective constituencies, along with having a fanatical arm of idiots who think random killings of people in Israel (some of them Palestinians) will actually achieve something.

Well then I am sure that you are politically aware enough to know that Hizbollah runs the hospitals, schools, and social welfare system of southern Lebanon as well as hold elected seats in the Lebanese parliament. And I am also sure that you are politically aware that Hizbollahs started this war by indiscriminately shelling CIVILIAN homes in northern Israel. And yet, here we are, on opposite sides with our perceptions of reality.

In assuming you are also historically aware, I am sure that you know, from all examples historically, that a sustained guerrilla war takes the wholesale support of the population. In a guerilla war, the population are in fact passive combatants. Just drive down a street of southern Lebanon and you will see the support of groups like Hizbollah. The same is true in Palestine for Hamas.

It is not the Israeli's (who, by the way, target rocket trajectories usually by computer and respond) who hate these children. It is the Muslim men who intentionally send the rockets from near a building of refugees in Qana. Their intent in that moment is not to actually kill any Israelis mind you, but rather to get it on TV so people such as yourself can get all bothered and not really understand what is happening.

On a semi-tangent, what exactly is an "innocent?"

To call the 30 year occupation of the OTs and the attendant oppression of the Palestinians "war" is to employ a false coinage that only serves the interest of Israel.

Dan, I am curious. How do you believe the 1967 war began?

If we are talking about the settlement of Palestinian land by the Israeli settlers, then I agree with you. It was a provacative act by religious nuts. But neither side is innocent of this fact. And yet, here you are, so decidely in one camp.

I'm well aware that stupidity and delusion are universal. However, it is a Jewish thing insofar as the "Jewish thing" now looms large in our own cultural mentality as well as being a very significant factor in American culture - at all levels. Anyone who thinks Israel is just a middle-eastern issue just doesn't get it.

Again, if the Jews had a choice, what would that choice be? Hypothetically, give them all the power in the Universe and tell me what their choice would be. And then turn that around. What would the Muslims of the Middle East choose?

Your horror at the bloodlust is misplaced.

ME: The Israeli commander matches his opponents care for the children of Israel, intentionally or not.

YOU: In saying that you show that you are not really getting the bigger picture. It's not just what he did, it's the official line he embodies and the arrogance of an entire state system that is the real issue.

Oh, I get it. I live with it daily. I am an American afterall. I live under the tyranny of the most shameful excuse for a President and "world leader" that I have seen in my lifetime. He is not even a decent person.

But to imagine Victorian style morality on the battlefield is only good for romance novels.

ME: Children are often the first to die. They run the slowest and don't hide well.

YOU: Hmm, so we just gun them down needlessly because we can? I'm sorry, even the maddest of the mad suicide bombers aren't that bad. At least they have the decency to rid us of themselves.

You are implying I advocate it. For me, it is similar to saying lava is hot.

And the baddest of the bad suicide bombers are not that bad? Are you kidding? When is the last time a suicide bomber did NOT try to kill "innocent" women and children?

Do you remember that one line in the brilliant Kubrick's Full Metal Jacket? Joker was riding shotgun in a helicopter gunship as the gunner was strafing the rice fields, full of villagers.

Joker: "How can you kill women and children?"
Gunner: "Easy. You just don't lead them so much."

DAN: You do know it was an anti-war film, right?

Yes. It is a brilliant film by a brilliant director in the vein of Dr. Strangelove. I am of the same mind.

ME: War is hell.

YOU: War is indeed. But you're employing that false coinage again. That girl was not shot in a war; an occupation is not a war.

Tell that to the men who shot her. Tell that to the young girl's older brothers and father and the local Imam and Koranic schoolteachers.

ME: And Hell is the Paradise that many Muslims seek. 72 virgin whores is only a reward for those already corrutped.

YOU: How many virgin whores does a 13 year old girl get? And what does she do with them once she gets them?

I feel sorry for her too. I wish it wasn't like this. But it is.

Lava is hot. Moralizing, at this point, is not going to solve the problem.

drowden wrote:Diebert,

I'm almost certain Brazil belongs on that list as well.

Well, in a way. According to this Jewish source, it was one of places they were trying to settle but it lasted only for a little while.

In the last decade of the 19th century, European Jews began discussing the idea of establishing agricultural settlements in Brazil as an alternative to the unfavorable conditions in Europe. (...)

The settlers who abandoned the colonies set up rich cultural communities in Brazilian cities.

Almost 30,000 Western European Jews came to Brazil in the 1920s and, by 1929, there were 27 Jewish schools. (...)

Brazil began an assimilation effort in 1938 and closed the Yiddish newspapers and the Jewish organizations, both secular and religious. A wave of anti-Semitism followed, including several editions of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Only after Brazil adopted a new, more democratic constitution in 1945, did organized Jewish activities resume.

In 1947, Brazil voted for the partition of Palestine and for the creation of a Jewish state at the United Nations General Assembly

Tharan wrote:And I am also sure that you are politically aware that Hizbollahs started this war by indiscriminately shelling CIVILIAN homes in northern Israel.

FYI, the shelling in this particular war only started after Israel invaded Lebanon as a response to capturing IDF soldiers. Just like Hezbollah came into existence after Israel occupied Lebanon and never properly left.

Tharan wrote:In assuming you are also historically aware, I am sure that you know, from all examples historically, that a sustained guerrilla war takes the wholesale support of the population.

That's why people who decide to fight a guerilla group in a populated area are the ones with the most blood on their hand. It's a war lost before it even started. Or are you implying guerilla warfare is not fair? Hiding behind (mostly supportive) civilians is just another tactic, and one that should be respected and feared. And not used as a reason to start killing innocents.

Tharan wrote:It is the Muslim men who intentionally send the rockets from near a building of refugees in Qana. Their intent in that moment is not to actually kill any Israelis mind you, but rather to get it on TV so people such as yourself can get all bothered and not really understand what is happening.

Bullshit conjecture, out of thin air. If the IDF has no precise intelligence to go on, they should stick their guns were the sun doesn't shine. I heard some IDF pilots are missing their targets on purpose now since they have lost trust in the quality of their data. I wonder what made them think so...

URW wrote:Human Rights Watch also added that its own researchers, who visited Qana on 31 July, the day after the attack, did not find any destroyed military equipment in or near the house. "Similarly, none of the dozens of international journalists, rescue workers and international observers who visited Qana on July 30 and 31 reported seeing any evidence of Hezbollah military presence in or around the home. Rescue workers recovered no bodies of apparent Hezbollah fighters from inside or near the building."

Diebert, I generally like what you write, but am I really supposed to respond to "I heard that Isreali pilots eat live kittens" or something similar?

Please explain for our dear readers WHY Israel occupied southern Lebanon. Was it for treasure? Women? Oil?

That's why people who decide to fight a guerilla group in a populated area are the ones with the most blood on their hand.

Israel responded. They did not instigate. They vacated their buffer zone from their victory in '67 and vacated their buffer zone in southern Lebanon, and look what they get in return.

Before I respond any further to this outrageously unfair POV, tell me, how exactly do you feel about the mindset of the aggressions of Hizbollah and Hamas? Are they like innocent little children who have merely been provoked? If not for the evil Israelis, would they have a functioning liberal society that someone such as yourself would be comfortable living in? Why or why not?

If both sides of this conflict were equally armed, tell me how you might imagine the tactics of the ones you protect with your words.

Hiding behind (mostly supportive) civilians is just another tactic, and one that should be respected and feared.

Fears like this is the seed of your defeat. I would take full advantage of it and destroy you. And their are many who feel the same way on the Muslim side. I take this stance because I recognize the mindset in myself.

"Similarly, none of the dozens of international journalists, rescue workers and international observers who visited Qana on July 30 and 31 reported seeing any evidence of Hezbollah military presence in or around the home. Rescue workers recovered no bodies of apparent Hezbollah fighters from inside or near the building."

How long do you think it takes to set down a mortor tripod, drop in three rounds, then pick up tripod and run off? I have $100us that says I could do it in under 2 minutes.

Also, please explain for us what it is in the history of the culture of the Jews that would cause the behavior of desiring the deaths of children. Surely, they must be salivating at the sight of the charred bodies, yes? And surely, they are lying when they apoligize with ashen face for the whole world to see. And surely, the enemy is equally apologetic when their rockets murder Israeli women and children, yes?

The emotionalism and lack of reason, in this case from people I normally think of as generally rational, astounds me. And it is world wide phenomenon. I really have no explanation for why it is. I have never seen anything like it.

In any of the instances, if you simply reverse the roles and outcomes as a mind experiment, it is blindingly obvious how irrational this is. I am literally amazed that I find myself defending the Israelis, who I have no particualr love for in the first place.

Tharan slithered:

It is not a Jewish thing, Dan. It is a human thing. The Israeli commander matches his opponents care for the children of Israel, intentionally or not. Children are often the first to die. They run the slowest and don't hide well.

You were doing alright, up until the next line:

War is hell. And Hell is the Paradise that many Muslims seek. 72 virgin whores is only a reward for those already corrutped.

Fantastic. The hypocrisy is astounding. It’s a human thing only on the Israeli side, right?

millipodium: And israelis are killing for what? A mythologically god granted ethnic homeland, to fulfill prophecy?

Don’t be silly. They’re not Muslims. Hence, they cannot possibly be seeking hell on the grounds of religious belief stoked by mythology. No, no. They, like the US, are the heroes: the beacon of truth, justice and the American way…

In rational analysis, we apply a totally different set of rules for each side because, hell, we‘re dealing with “Muslims”!

Funny how Muslims everywhere (many) have the 72-virgin-whores-in-heaven mentality but Jews, well, they‘re existence has nothing to do with YHWH and the promised land; that‘s just Muslim propaganda.

Embrace. Uncle Sam needs you.

.

Leyla Shen wrote:

Fantastic. The hypocrisy is astounding. It’s a human thing only on the Israeli side, right?

Yes, both parties are irrational Leyla, however if one had to measure irrationality, the fundamentalist Arabs actions are much more despicable.

Generally Israel doesn’t even want war, they want to be left alone. Their military is a much more defensive force than the Hezabollah.

Generally Israel only plans invasions and bombings after it has been attacked. The Hezabollah use their ideologies to fuel attacks.

Generally Jews just want to make money and be left alone, the a-typical behavior.
Generally the fundamentalist Arabs want to fight holy wars in the name of Allah.

The Arab fundamentalists are the aggressors here, you have the fucker and the fucked.

The one who is being fucked is responding choicelessly to the fucker.

So the truth is that the Arabs are the fuckers.

The Hezabollah have a long history of blowing up buildings in other counties in the name of their cause/ideology. The state of Israel only engages in attacks close to its borders as more of a self-protective response.

Both are irrational forces, but one is much more irrational than the other.

Generally, psychologically speaking the fundamentalist Arabs seem to be much more inferior emotionally compared to the general Jewish population.