Israeli Army Kills 8-Year-Old Palestinian Boy - Page 2

CyberGnu · November 25, 2002, 23:14

Jules, I don't think you got my meaning. Israelis can't use the suffering they are experiencing as an excuse, as it is their own actiosn that cause the suffering. It is a circular argument.

The better way you speak of simply for Israel to give up their imperial ambitions. Leave palestine, let the palestinians have self determination, compensate the people Israel drove out. But this isn't going to happen unless the US forces Israel to do so: during its 50 year long history, Israel has never taken the moral choice unless forced to do so.

Quote:

I think that applies more to Netanyahu than Sharon. Sharon hasn't actually said, "No peace...period," whereas Netanyahu has said so. Sharon is bad, but Netanyahu is much worse.

Can't say I see any difference between the two... Only in posturing, where the one currently not in power is the most hawkish.

Felch · November 25, 2002, 23:14

So? What's so special about countries? I don't have a personal country, although Felchland would be a cool place to live.

What I do instead is get along with the people around me. There's nothing sacred about Palestinians that says they have to have a nation. They can live just as happily wherever they are, as long as they get along.

I know the Israelis started the terrorism back in the fourties. That doesn't mean the Palestinians shouldn't end the terrorism now. It's time to get past silly notions of nationalism and realize that we're all humans and we can easily get along as long as one people.

Dr. Nick · November 25, 2002, 23:16

Felch, I'm not arguing it isn't, but they have a right to self determination as much as the Israelis. If it were upto me, I'd also wish they got along, but the hippy shyte just won't work.

Felch · November 25, 2002, 23:16

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu
The better way you speak of simply for Israel to give up their imperial ambitions. Leave palestine, let the palestinians have self determination, compensate the people Israel drove out. But this isn't going to happen unless the US forces Israel to do so: during its 50 year long history, Israel has never taken the moral choice unless forced to do so.

The best thing would be if people could get along. But this isn't going to happen unless Europe and the US force Israel and the Palestinians to do so: during their 50 year long history, Israel and the Palestinians have never taken the moral choice unless forced to do so.

Felch · November 25, 2002, 23:19

S'all good, El Awrence. I just like jumping up and taking the moral high ground on occasion. It's fun to imagine if I had a temporary lobotamy and started acting like CyberGnu or David Floyd, unfettered by reality and only seeing my own ideology.

CyberGnu · November 25, 2002, 23:26

Quote:

I think he means peacefully protesting and not killing innocent people in bombings. Those two kind of go together.

If the pals were totally peaceful in 1990 they would have had my support. If they were peaceful now they'd have my support. But **** if I'll give support to a bunch of savages who bomb buses, and then celebrate in the streets. The Israelis at least don't give candy to children when they kill innocent civilians.

So you condemn the entire nation based on one group of extremists?

Right now most palestinians side with Hamas, since Israel showed that they never intended to fulfill their Oslo obligations anyway. But in the years between 1990 and 1996, most palestinians actually believed that the Oslo process would peacefully lead to a palestinian nation, and consequently put their energies into makeing palestine a prosperous nation.

CyberGnu · November 25, 2002, 23:27

Quote:

It's fun to imagine if I had a temporary lobotamy and started acting like CyberGnu or David Floyd, unfettered by reality and only seeing my own ideology.

And how is that, exactly?

Felch · November 25, 2002, 23:30

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu
So you condemn the entire nation based on one group of extremists?

Given that the entire nation has shown broad support for that one group of extremists - yes. If the Palestinians did not openly applaud the actions of the extremists, I would not judge them by the actions of the extremists. Does that make sense?

Quote:

Right now most palestinians side with Hamas, since Israel showed that they never intended to fulfill their Oslo obligations anyway. But in the years between 1990 and 1996, most palestinians actually believed that the Oslo process would peacefully lead to a palestinian nation, and consequently put their energies into makeing palestine a prosperous nation.

Okay, that's great, the Palestinians were a great bunch of people, and deserved to live happily and in peace. Oh, and it's 2002 right now by the way.

CyberGnu · November 25, 2002, 23:30

Re-reading your posts on this page I realize that you have no intention of serious debate. Trolling followed by personal insults... Nice.

Please call again if you have anything intelligent to say.

Zylka · November 25, 2002, 23:30

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu

And how is that, exactly?

For starters - answering this:

When the palestinians start peaceably protesting against the Israeli actions, then they'll have my sympathy. As long as they keep blowing themselves up in retaliations, I won't sympathize with them.

With this:

Ixnay, so you became a palestinian supporter in 1990?

What the f*ck kind of ignorant dreamworld do you live in???

Felch · November 25, 2002, 23:34

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu
And how is that, exactly?

Anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian, and impossible to waver in any other direction. You know full well that when an ME debate comes up you're as predictable as David Floyd in a debate about government's role. Don't take it badly that you're repetetive, it's nice to know that there are costants in the world.

My own ideology is that people should get along and not fight over pointless crap like who violated what accord. If the accord was violated, big deal. That doesn't mean that people should keep fighting and causing so much devastation. I know that my ideology is unrealistic, just like David's and your's. But it is a dream, and dreams aren't a bad thing to have.

CyberGnu · November 25, 2002, 23:35

Quote:

What the f*ck kind of ignorant dreamworld do you live in???

A magical world where people are intelligent and can respond coherently with logical arguments. I see you are not familiar with this world.

Felch · November 25, 2002, 23:36

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Re-reading your posts on this page I realize that you have no intention of serious debate. Trolling followed by personal insults... Nice.

Please call again if you have anything intelligent to say.

Saying that people should stop killing each other is not a troll. Saying that you are an ideologue is not a personal insult. The former is a statement of opinion, and the latter of fact.

Felch · November 25, 2002, 23:38

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu
A magical world where people are intelligent and can respond coherently with logical arguments. I see you are not familiar with this world.

I think Zylka's problem was that your response wasn't logical. It assumed that Ixnay was fully aware of the Palestinian situation in 1990, that he held the same views then, and that he would have continued to support them even when they failed to meet the criteria he set out.

CyberGnu · November 25, 2002, 23:38

Quote:

Anti-Israeli, pro-Palestinian, and impossible to waver in any other direction. You know full well that when an ME debate comes up you're as predictable as David Floyd in a debate about government's role. Don't take it badly that you're repetetive, it's nice to know that there are costants in the world.

I don't take that part badly. Why would I change? No one has yet managed to present a good argument why theft of aggression should be allowed.

It is the "lobotomy" part I take offense at.

Quote:

My own ideology is that people should get along and not fight over pointless crap like who violated what accord. If the accord was violated, big deal. That doesn't mean that people should keep fighting and causing so much devastation. I know that my ideology is unrealistic, just like David's and your's. But it is a dream, and dreams aren't a bad thing to have.

What part of my ideology is unrealistic? That peace will only come is Israel is forced to leave palestine?

Zylka · November 25, 2002, 23:41

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu

A magical world where people are intelligent and can respond coherently with logical arguments. I see you are not familiar with this world.

Indeed! Then perhaps you would care to clarify just what exactly your ignorant response to ixnay's post meant?

Felch · November 25, 2002, 23:49

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu
It is the "lobotomy" part I take offense at.

Yeah, that is an offensive thing to say. Point is, ideologues run on autopilot, they don't think. Ask DF a question about governmental power, and you'll get the same response. Ask one of the Israeli apologists or you about the ME, and you get the same response. Ask me or Zylka about drugs, and you'll get the same response. It's posting on autopilot, and while you thought your ideas out beforehand, you aren't continuing to think them through. So debating with you is like debating someone who's been lobotomized, or with a computer program. You have oodles of background knowledge and expertise going out, but you've decided willfully to not let anything new in.

Quote:

What part of my ideology is unrealistic? That peace will only come is Israel is forced to leave palestine?

Yes, that part. Different people can live in the same area and not kill each other. Expecting people to live in harmony isn't extraordinary. And believing that purging the Middle East of Jews will make everything better for the Palestinians is unrealistic. The PA has proven to be corrupt and tyranical just like the Algerian government. Even if Palestine were alone, without Zion to worry about, internal strife would still cause problems because Europeans have taught Palestinians that violence is okay. If you disagree with that, fine, it's just my opinion.

Ming · November 25, 2002, 23:55

It doesn't surprise me since this is another ME thread...

CHILL... the next personal insult earns somebody a vacation. Again... I don't care who started it... but the next person that continues it is toast... sigh...

Zylka · November 25, 2002, 23:57

Did "someone" report a post?

Ming · November 25, 2002, 23:59

No... I just had to read throught the thread to see that a warning was called for... no complaints from anybody tonight... yet

Zylka · November 26, 2002, 00:12

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu

(Nothing)

Mmmm hmmm, indeed. Oh, I see! That was an intelligent, coherent, logical argument to my question! Ignoring your own one sided mistakes seems to be another part of this magical world.

Felch · November 26, 2002, 00:17

Now Zylka, would you say that CyberGnu's manifesto was post-punk-neo-liberalism, or was it more like proto-utopian-exist Torvaldism with a dash of New Social History?

Ming · November 26, 2002, 00:18

See you in 24 hours Zylka...

Anybody else want to make some personal attacks?

ravagon · November 26, 2002, 00:30

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu

What part of my ideology is unrealistic? That peace will only come is Israel is forced to leave palestine?

Unfortunately that is probably the unrealistic part. I'm sure the Israelis would be only too happy to leave quite happily under that condition. The problem though comes about in that they don't believe it. I don't either ...

CyberGnu · November 26, 2002, 00:36

Hell yeah!! Ming, you have a really small ... left nostril?

Felch: Torvaldism? Isn't that the guy who wrote Linux?

Quote:

Yeah, that is an offensive thing to say. Point is, ideologues run on autopilot, they don't think. Ask DF a question about governmental power, and you'll get the same response. Ask one of the Israeli apologists or you about the ME, and you get the same response. Ask me or Zylka about drugs, and you'll get the same response. It's posting on autopilot, and while you thought your ideas out beforehand, you aren't continuing to think them through. So debating with you is like debating someone who's been lobotomized, or with a computer program. You have oodles of background knowledge and expertise going out, but you've decided willfully to not let anything new in.

OK, I see what you mean, although I don't agree with you. I'm a scientist, I change my mind on a daily basis based on my latest research results. Two months ago I spent 3 hours vigorously defending a proposed mechanism, only to completely reverse my view after coming up with a way to check it.

If Israel by their own accord decide to leave Palestine, then I'll re-evaluate my views of the nation.

Quote:

Yes, that part. Different people can live in the same area and not kill each other. Expecting people to live in harmony isn't extraordinary. And believing that purging the Middle East of Jews will make everything better for the Palestinians is unrealistic. The PA has proven to be corrupt and tyranical just like the Algerian government. Even if Palestine were alone, without Zion to worry about, internal strife would still cause problems because Europeans have taught Palestinians that violence is okay. If you disagree with that, fine, it's just my opinion.

So, basically, two people can live peacefully next to each other as long as one is willing to be obediant slaves to the other?

What europeans (and not to mention americans, afganis, vietnamese etc etc) have taught the palestinians is that every people have a right to defend themselves against oppression. No one should be forced to accept rulership through force of arms.

CyberGnu · November 26, 2002, 00:40

ravagon:\

Quote:

I'm sure the Israelis would be only too happy to leave quite happily under that condition. The problem though comes about in that they don't believe it. I don't either ...

The question is, what do you base that view on? Sharons atrocities, Netanyahus public statements, the assassination of Rabin, all of them show that a peaceful solution is not what Israel wants. Israel preferes to extend the conflict indefiently, and incrementally steal more and more palestinian land. The population and square milleage of the settlements have more than doubles since Israel agreed to freeze them in the Oslo accord - If Israel truly wanted peace why would they not only accept the expansion of the settlment but actually encourage them?!

Felch · November 26, 2002, 00:47

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu
Felch: Torvaldism? Isn't that the guy who wrote Linux?

Sure, I guess. I'd heard the name somewhere and decided to toss it into the other gibberish

Quote:

OK, I see what you mean, although I don't agree with you. I'm a scientist, I change my mind on a daily basis based on my latest research results. Two months ago I spent 3 hours vigorously defending a proposed mechanism, only to completely reverse my view after coming up with a way to check it.

If Israel by their own accord decide to leave Palestine, then I'll re-evaluate my views of the nation.

I never said you were stupid. Just that you temporarily shut your brain down and cruise in auto-pilot. The problem with your views on the ME is that you refuse to examine the situation from any other angle. So long as the status quo exists you will persist in your views. The problem with that is that the status quo exists because people won't change their views or look at things from multiple angles.

Quote:

So, basically, two people can live peacefully next to each other as long as one is willing to be obediant slaves to the other?

What europeans (and not to mention americans, afganis, vietnamese etc etc) have taught the palestinians is that every people have a right to defend themselves against oppression. No one should be forced to accept rulership through force of arms.

Two people can live peacefully so long as they respect each other's rights. The rights of Israeli-Arabs have historically been protected, and my belief is that if there were no violence between Palestinians and Israelis, then the rights of all people in Israel would be protected.

The right to wage war against oppression relies on that oppression existing before the rebellion, and it relies on the rebels having exhausted every other means of getting their liberties. War is not just unless it is employed as a last resort. The reason I don't support the Palestinian uprising is because I don't believe they have made a good faith effort in the past to broker a settlement with the Israelis, and because I believe that violence has existed since the founding of Israel, and the current uprising is not seperable from that. In other words, the Palestinians never made any effort for peace.

In terms of the master-slave arangment, I know it sucks, but the fact is that Israel can defeat Palestine militarily. If Palestine wants to wage war, it can therefore hope for nothing better than status as slaves. If Palestine wants to strive for peace, then they could live as brothers with the Jews and Arabs in Israel.

Felch · November 26, 2002, 00:52

Quote:

Originally posted by CyberGnu
The question is, what do you base that view on? Sharons atrocities, Netanyahus public statements, the assassination of Rabin, all of them show that a peaceful solution is not what Israel wants. Israel preferes to extend the conflict indefiently, and incrementally steal more and more palestinian land.

If there were a poll today in Israel (which is a democracy unlike any of the Muslim Arab states) I have faith that the Israeli people would prefer peace and a return to the terms of the Oslo accords without terror over war, expansion, and terrorism. However, I haven't seen any polling data, and can't be sure. Our best bet would be to do an informal survey of the Israeli posters here.

Quote:

The population and square milleage of the settlements have more than doubles since Israel agreed to freeze them in the Oslo accord - If Israel truly wanted peace why would they not only accept the expansion of the settlment but actually encourage them?!

Because they somehow feel that those settlements give their nation security, something that the Oslo accords did not give them. If you want to know why Israel does anything irrational, the answer is simple: fear for their very existence.

Eli · November 26, 2002, 01:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Al'Kimiya
They probably didn't have time asking his age, since the dummy explosive belt he was carrying looked oh so real.

There were cases of children with real suicide belts.

Do you want to volunteer to check every child whether he carries a real gun or a plastic one? A real suicide belt or not?

CyberGnu · November 26, 2002, 01:05

Quote:

I never said you were stupid. Just that you temporarily shut your brain down and cruise in auto-pilot. The problem with your views on the ME is that you refuse to examine the situation from any other angle. So long as the status quo exists you will persist in your views. The problem with that is that the status quo exists because people won't change their views or look at things from multiple angles.

Well, if the status quo is maintained, what need is there to re-evaluate the conclusions? If no new data is presented, the logical conclusion reached yesterday is the same as the logical conclusion reached today.

But present new facts, and a re-evaluation is always warranted.

Quote:

Two people can live peacefully so long as they respect each other's rights. The rights of Israeli-Arabs have historically been protected

Felch, the vast majority of palestinians were driven out of Israel at the moment of its conception. Some of them by violence, many of them by the threat of violence, most of them by fear of violence. None were allowed to return. None of them recieved compensation for their confiscated land or property. None of the people responsible ever recieved a punishment. To claim that their "rights were respected" is a bit far fetched, don't you think?

Quote:

, and my belief is that if there were no violence between Palestinians and Israelis, then the rights of all people in Israel would be protected.

Well, this was the situation before 1920, before zionism reared its ugly head... But once Pandorax box was opened, nothing could close the lid again.

Quote:

The right to wage war against oppression relies on that oppression existing before the rebellion, and it relies on the rebels having exhausted every other means of getting their liberties. War is not just unless it is employed as a last resort. The reason I don't support the Palestinian uprising is because I don't believe they have made a good faith effort in the past to broker a settlement with the Israelis, and because I believe that violence has existed since the founding of Israel, and the current uprising is not seperable from that. In other words, the Palestinians never made any effort for peace.

So what do you call the Oslo accord?

Quote:

In terms of the master-slave arangment, I know it sucks, but the fact is that Israel can defeat Palestine militarily. If Palestine wants to wage war, it can therefore hope for nothing better than status as slaves. If Palestine wants to strive for peace, then they could live as brothers with the Jews and Arabs in Israel.

I'm sorry, but I can't do anything but aggressively reject this view. You're advocating that might gives right. Once a neighbour is subjugated, they should bend their necks in all perpetuity.

I've had this discussion before, but I don't think I've heard your view: DeGaulle, criminal or hero?