First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
Israel
1394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 6/20/10 , edited 6/20/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


orangeflute wrote:

Hamas is still an terrorist organisation, like the KKK, which wish death to the Israeli nation and to the Jewish people, a siege is not against any international law, being a common tactic in warfare, and as to my relationship with China and Communism, I will just disregard this ad hominem attack, being irrelevent and pointless. I can say, with equal irrelevency, that your sympathies with the Palestinian people is mainly because you share the same religion. Israel has not violated any international law, and, even if several countries disagree.


How do you define a group as terrorist? For Israel, Hamas is terrorist. For Palestinians, Israel is terrorist. For thief, policeman is terrorist for creating terror in their heart. Hamas is being recognized by its people to rep[resent the will of Palestinians to get their rights to live peacefully. Of course, many of their method are wrong, the same as Israel

Seeing there are always nationalist and patriotic people in each country, mostly there are always be resistance to oppose the foreign troops and puppet government. However, the people who are struggle to take their country back would mostly being called and accused as 'Terrorist' that make the country unstable. That's how they get public opinion to favor those who are killing the innocent people and reject the existence of nationalist whoa re just trying to take their country back. It makes people are being manipulated and asking ignorant question as Why do people always hate this nation? . If you don't agree to live under the foreign governments who have destroyed your country and oppose them, be prepared to be called as Terrorist.

About China and Russia matter, it's not ad hominem, it's called assumption. It's common to be used in discussion.

So there's no violation of international law from Israel? It's very biased statements. I know you don't like to read it, but it's the matter of fact, not the result of ignorant statements.



The recent violation according to Flotilla Freedom, it's not several countries disagree, the major countries have disagree even the Canadian, French, EU, UN and US condemn the attack.



Therefore it's not religion issue, it's humanitarian issue when people are being treated unfair and not according to Geneva Convention and several international laws.



When you go around lanching missiles into grade schools, you are a terrorist, as in, you are trying to achieve your goals through the medium of terror upon the populance. Israel may accidentally attack schools and homes as well, but they do not do so on purpose, what would be called collateral damage in Military jargon, whereas Hamas attack those places with the intent of killing innocents and scaring the wit out of the populance. Hamas represent the Gaza strips will to destroy Israel, not peace. If they were for peace, they would be negotiating instead of slaughtering.

Likewise, they have their own government, but they chose a group of militant terrorist to represent them, based upon their rethoric of blood and steel. They never own that 'country', it was the Ottoman's, the British, and then the Israelis. They didn't seem to oppose teh Ottomans or the British that much, and they lead their greatest resistence when Israel was still weak. So much for the heroics.

Concerning your statement, you were right, 'You would fit is fine with Communist China and Russia' may sound like a irrelevent ad Hominem attack, but, it is actually a respectable device known as 'assuming that you will be fine and dandy with acknowledged "evil" countries, clumping you with them, and then attacking you based upon that', which is totally not ad hominem. I humbly apologise.

Some me an example (which I will not be surprised if you find none or if you go to Al-Jezeera to find them) of the violation of those articles, instead of saying 'oh they happen routinely in palestinian life'.

In short, Palestinians may well move to friendlier grounds--oh wait--they are actually treated worse by fellow Moslem countries then they are by the Israelis. My bad.
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 6/20/10 , edited 6/20/10

papagolfwhiskey wrote:


Ryutai-Desk wrote:

There is a link to quote if you want someone to notice it.



Wait... what? I have to quote you before you'll read a post on this thread? Well that explains why no one has commented on the multiple posts I've made here.

but then... how did you find the interest to make your first post to this thread?

I find your willingness to ignore posts just because your attention wasn't brought to them disappointing. It inclines me to disregard anything you post here. Before I made my first post I laboured through every page on this thread. I might have missed or forgetten something becuase frankly It was enough material to make my eyes glaze over at times. but I tried. I find the idea that people are so self centered that they ignore posts that don't quote them, Very disappointing for a forum that claims to be about scholarly discourse.



No, but you mentioned that nobody paid attention to your post. So I did.

It was primarily not because of Israel, but many comments here is insulting and make mockery my faith and without having proper proof to support their claim. So I replied to them, to say that's not true. I did not insult them in my replies, was I?

If you really want to make a point to support your statement, then it's recommended to quote. That's we have quote link here. I find it very discouraged to make a conversation without trying to notify the participant you wanted to refute their statements. It's pretty childish too to make this discussion into 'I win, you lose' situation, as the purpose for discussion is not to find the winner but to seek the knowledge and truth.


papagolfwhiskey wrote:


Also I wouldn't mind if you took it slower and made it simpler for a dumb infidel like myself. I think I am misunderstanding you or you misunderstood me when I spoke of the POST British Mandate attacks on Jewish Territory by Palestinians and most other Arab nations with a thinly concealed backing/good wishes by Britain (primarily... I think France was more involved in encouraging Israeli in it's first act of aggressive war against Egypt)

Also think your fingers are racing ahead of your meanings in a few places. your post could use a rewrite for clarity. I'd rather not respond erroneously because of a typo.



I won't make disrespect remarks like that to address my point.

There are many reasons why Six Days War with Israel against Arab League occurred. In case of Egypt, actually Israel threatened Syria to attack them, but Egypt was the one who intercepted Israel's army. It also concerns the rights of Egypt regarding the Straits of Tiran. It'll be nice if you directly explain your point, so no misunderstanding happens.

Once again, I'd like to talk about solution instead throwing faults of whose side is responsible. Both are wrong and both has rights to live as well.
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 6/20/10

orangeflute wrote:

When you go around lanching missiles into grade schools, you are a terrorist, as in, you are trying to achieve your goals through the medium of terror upon the populance. Israel may accidentally attack schools and homes as well, but they do not do so on purpose, what would be called collateral damage in Military jargon, whereas Hamas attack those places with the intent of killing innocents and scaring the wit out of the populance. Hamas represent the Gaza strips will to destroy Israel, not peace. If they were for peace, they would be negotiating instead of slaughtering.

Likewise, they have their own government, but they chose a group of militant terrorist to represent them, based upon their rethoric of blood and steel. They never own that 'country', it was the Ottoman's, the British, and then the Israelis. They didn't seem to oppose teh Ottomans or the British that much, and they lead their greatest resistence when Israel was still weak. So much for the heroics.

Concerning your statement, you were right, 'You would fit is fine with Communist China and Russia' may sound like a irrelevent ad Hominem attack, but, it is actually a respectable device known as 'assuming that you will be fine and dandy with acknowledged "evil" countries, clumping you with them, and then attacking you based upon that', which is totally not ad hominem. I humbly apologise.

Some me an example (which I will not be surprised if you find none or if you go to Al-Jezeera to find them) of the violation of those articles, instead of saying 'oh they happen routinely in palestinian life'.

In short, Palestinians may well move to friendlier grounds--oh wait--they are actually treated worse by fellow Moslem countries then they are by the Israelis. My bad.


I could say the same to Israel. Your post actually biased. When Israel did it to UN school, you said it was an accident. When Hamas did it, it was a massacre. Therefore:

When you go around launching missiles into grade schools, you are a terrorist, as in, you are trying to achieve your goals through the medium of terror upon the populace. Hamas may accidentally attack schools and homes as well, but they do not do so on purpose, what would be called collateral damage in Military jargon, whereas Israel attack those places with the intent of killing innocents and scaring the wit out of the populace. Israel represent the Orthodox Jews will to destroy Palestinian, not peace. If they were for peace, they would be negotiating instead of slaughtering.

Like I said, the definition of terrorist is different to each individual depends on which side you belong. Hamas was being chosen in election to represent Palestinian people. They're terrorist for you, but hero to Palestinians. The same happened in South Africa, Nelson Mandela was treated as terrorist and they were being imprisoned by British. But for South Africans, Mandela is a hero.

The breach of international laws was based on UN reports by international human rights group, so we can assume, there's no bias there. Look, what I want is the solution for both of them to live together peacefully, like Americans after civil war, Australia after independence, etc. I want them to stop conflict and starting to trust each other and live together like they used to be.

1394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 6/20/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


orangeflute wrote:

When you go around lanching missiles into grade schools, you are a terrorist, as in, you are trying to achieve your goals through the medium of terror upon the populance. Israel may accidentally attack schools and homes as well, but they do not do so on purpose, what would be called collateral damage in Military jargon, whereas Hamas attack those places with the intent of killing innocents and scaring the wit out of the populance. Hamas represent the Gaza strips will to destroy Israel, not peace. If they were for peace, they would be negotiating instead of slaughtering.

Likewise, they have their own government, but they chose a group of militant terrorist to represent them, based upon their rethoric of blood and steel. They never own that 'country', it was the Ottoman's, the British, and then the Israelis. They didn't seem to oppose teh Ottomans or the British that much, and they lead their greatest resistence when Israel was still weak. So much for the heroics.

Concerning your statement, you were right, 'You would fit is fine with Communist China and Russia' may sound like a irrelevent ad Hominem attack, but, it is actually a respectable device known as 'assuming that you will be fine and dandy with acknowledged "evil" countries, clumping you with them, and then attacking you based upon that', which is totally not ad hominem. I humbly apologise.

Some me an example (which I will not be surprised if you find none or if you go to Al-Jezeera to find them) of the violation of those articles, instead of saying 'oh they happen routinely in palestinian life'.

In short, Palestinians may well move to friendlier grounds--oh wait--they are actually treated worse by fellow Moslem countries then they are by the Israelis. My bad.


I could say the same to Israel. Your post actually biased. When Israel did it to UN school, you said it was an accident. When Hamas did it, it was a massacre. Therefore:

When you go around launching missiles into grade schools, you are a terrorist, as in, you are trying to achieve your goals through the medium of terror upon the populace. Hamas may accidentally attack schools and homes as well, but they do not do so on purpose, what would be called collateral damage in Military jargon, whereas Israel attack those places with the intent of killing innocents and scaring the wit out of the populace. Israel represent the Orthodox Jews will to destroy Palestinian, not peace. If they were for peace, they would be negotiating instead of slaughtering.

Like I said, the definition of terrorist is different to each individual depends on which side you belong. Hamas was being chosen in election to represent Palestinian people. They're terrorist for you, but hero to Palestinians. The same happened in South Africa, Nelson Mandela was treated as terrorist and they were being imprisoned by British. But for South Africans, Mandela is a hero.

The breach of international laws was based on UN reports by international human rights group, so we can assume, there's no bias there. Look, what I want is the solution for both of them to live together peacefully, like Americans after civil war, Australia after independence, etc. I want them to stop conflict and starting to trust each other and live together like they used to be.



You statement is actually much, much more bias-

1- It was indeed an accident as they did not intend that it should be destroyed, but you can hardly call it an accident when you have a ground missile pointed toward said gradeschool, launch it, and watch it blow.

2- Israel is composed mainly of Reformed and Conservative Jews, and is hardly representative of the minority Orthodox Jews. Of course, you cannot distinguish between them, probably, and so you have made yourself much much more foolish.

3- The international community (not just Israel) recognise them as terrorist. So, in the eyes of almost everyone, a mad group vowing the destruction of Israel and setting bombs in civilian areas is a terrorist group.

4- The British did not control South Africa at the time, the Apartheid government did. Not all white people are British, and certainly not the mostly Afrikaan-Dutch Apartheid government.

5- You show nothing to prove your claims. Only saying that I am wrong and that everything is subjective. The fact stands- Israel is open for negotiation, Hamas rejects them.
67725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 6/20/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:



Well first off. I meant no disrespect concerning my statement regarding clarity of posts. I really sincerely meant it as an effort to improve our dialogue. Their were passages in that extremely long post that were.... Convoluted, at best and indecipherable (by me at least). If we are going to talk we both need to avoid that as much as possible. (I see we because my own English can wax pretty arcane from time to time as well)

Secondly my comment about "I win" in one of my posts was deliberately provocative and born of the frustration that no one seemed to be reading my posts.

Third I'll be willing to go into details later. But I'm not so much casting blame as attempting to correct the blame that keeps getting cast on the Israelis. Your posts constantly portray them as Aggressors and Criminals with no legal or moral justifications for any of their actions in the last 63 years. Your idea of an acceptable settlement was the one violently rejected by the people you purport to support back in '47. With no way to trust that their opponents are truly willing to adhere to such a deal or that the supposed neutral arbiters have the neutrality, the will, or the strength to actually enforce the deal. I'm sure they'd much rather retain the secure position they've acquired through their own sweat and blood and in spite of, any international assistance they may have received. Are they angels? Heck no. I already conceded that they are and were eager co-beligerents. That fact that they seem to be 'winning' doesn't make the devils either though.

oh and for the record if you translate my Prime Minister's words from Diplomatese to English it basically comes out as...

"Yeah deaths are really bad, we should look into that... sometime..."

Hardly a heartfelt rebuke of the Israelis (and leaving aside the issue of weather they needed one or not)
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 6/20/10

orangeflute wrote:

You statement is actually much, much more bias-

1- It was indeed an accident as they did not intend that it should be destroyed, but you can hardly call it an accident when you have a ground missile pointed toward said gradeschool, launch it, and watch it blow.

2- Israel is composed mainly of Reformed and Conservative Jews, and is hardly representative of the minority Orthodox Jews. Of course, you cannot distinguish between them, probably, and so you have made yourself much much more foolish.

3- The international community (not just Israel) recognise them as terrorist. So, in the eyes of almost everyone, a mad group vowing the destruction of Israel and setting bombs in civilian areas is a terrorist group.

4- The British did not control South Africa at the time, the Apartheid government did. Not all white people are British, and certainly not the mostly Afrikaan-Dutch Apartheid government.

5- You show nothing to prove your claims. Only saying that I am wrong and that everything is subjective. The fact stands- Israel is open for negotiation, Hamas rejects them.


1. Israel didn't denies their attacks on school either. An IDF statement released on January 6 said an initial inquiry indicates that: "a number of mortar shells were fired at IDF forces from within the Jabaliya school. In response to the incoming enemy fire, the forces returned mortar fire to the source." But UNRWA Director of Operations in Gaza ,John Ging, said that the people in the school were all families seeking refuge from the fighting. Either way, there is no full UN investigation regarding to this, so we can't sure which one is right or wrong.

2. After the election taken place in February, Israeli Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud signed a coalition deal with ultra-Orthodox party Shas party early on Monday, party officials said, bringing the right-wing leader closer to assuming the premiership. Shas lined up alongside Yisrael Beitenu as partners in Netanyahu's fledgling coalition.

3. How do you defined it as international community? When the majority of middle-east, Asian, Africans, South American countries are not making the statements that recognize Hamas as terrorist, rather a insurgency movement. It's the pressure of big nations too. Even Japan which has nothing to do with the conflict said Hamas is terrorist group when they never step on the conflict.

4. You divert the topic. I mentioned Nelson Mandela was both terrorist and hero by both sides. It's the same as Hamas.

5. Israel does not want to talk with Hamas. Polls show that a majority of the Israelis support negotiations with Hamas, but official Israel refuses to talk to it, at any level. Israel instead launches a worldwide campaign to persuade all countries to boycott Hamas and to join its military and financial blockade on the newly formed Hamas government.

I'd like to talk about the solution as a healthy discussion to end the conflict instead heated it and put more hatred in both sides.



papagolfwhiskey wrote:


Well first off. I meant no disrespect concerning my statement regarding clarity of posts. I really sincerely meant it as an effort to improve our dialogue. Their were passages in that extremely long post that were.... Convoluted, at best and indecipherable (by me at least). If we are going to talk we both need to avoid that as much as possible. (I see we because my own English can wax pretty arcane from time to time as well)

Secondly my comment about "I win" in one of my posts was deliberately provocative and born of the frustration that no one seemed to be reading my posts.

Third I'll be willing to go into details later. But I'm not so much casting blame as attempting to correct the blame that keeps getting cast on the Israelis. Your posts constantly portray them as Aggressors and Criminals with no legal or moral justifications for any of their actions in the last 63 years. Your idea of an acceptable settlement was the one violently rejected by the people you purport to support back in '47. With no way to trust that their opponents are truly willing to adhere to such a deal or that the supposed neutral arbiters have the neutrality, the will, or the strength to actually enforce the deal. I'm sure they'd much rather retain the secure position they've acquired through their own sweat and blood and in spite of, any international assistance they may have received. Are they angels? Heck no. I already conceded that they are and were eager co-belligerents. That fact that they seem to be 'winning' doesn't make the devils either though.

oh and for the record if you translate my Prime Minister's words from Diplomatese to English it basically comes out as...

"Yeah deaths are really bad, we should look into that... sometime..."

Hardly a heartfelt rebuke of the Israelis (and leaving aside the issue of weather they needed one or not)


Firstly, that was my intention from begin with when I participated in this issue a year ago in CR. But rather, people here are just supporting each side they belong to. Well, it's pretty normal to have long writing in ED. The matter is, do we have endurance and will to read it and reply it in the same manner by dressing each points with supported argument. This was nothing compared to someone I knew before and I enjoyed it. If it's too long, I'll make it shorter for you.

Second, you did not to be provocative if you just quoted the post you wanted to refute. We do it all the time here.

Third, I compared the Israel occupation as the same with European aggression to America and Australia when they replaced the native inhabitant. But I recognized the aggression as just when there was no international laws that control about the laws of war and human rights. To be honest, I also recognized the existence of Israel if only they don't continue to blockade another inhabitant. If they can remove the blockade and act accordingly as international laws, it won't be problem. Just like America recognized the rights of black people and South African to lift up the Apartheid system.

Fourth, regardless of the response, the lives of people lost and the raid to Flotilla is illegal said the UN.
1394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 6/20/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


orangeflute wrote:

You statement is actually much, much more bias-

1- It was indeed an accident as they did not intend that it should be destroyed, but you can hardly call it an accident when you have a ground missile pointed toward said gradeschool, launch it, and watch it blow.

2- Israel is composed mainly of Reformed and Conservative Jews, and is hardly representative of the minority Orthodox Jews. Of course, you cannot distinguish between them, probably, and so you have made yourself much much more foolish.

3- The international community (not just Israel) recognise them as terrorist. So, in the eyes of almost everyone, a mad group vowing the destruction of Israel and setting bombs in civilian areas is a terrorist group.

4- The British did not control South Africa at the time, the Apartheid government did. Not all white people are British, and certainly not the mostly Afrikaan-Dutch Apartheid government.

5- You show nothing to prove your claims. Only saying that I am wrong and that everything is subjective. The fact stands- Israel is open for negotiation, Hamas rejects them.


1. Israel didn't denies their attacks on school either. An IDF statement released on January 6 said an initial inquiry indicates that: "a number of mortar shells were fired at IDF forces from within the Jabaliya school. In response to the incoming enemy fire, the forces returned mortar fire to the source." But UNRWA Director of Operations in Gaza ,John Ging, said that the people in the school were all families seeking refuge from the fighting. Either way, there is no full UN investigation regarding to this, so we can't sure which one is right or wrong.

2. After the election taken place in February, Israeli Prime Minister-designate Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud signed a coalition deal with ultra-Orthodox party Shas party early on Monday, party officials said, bringing the right-wing leader closer to assuming the premiership. Shas lined up alongside Yisrael Beitenu as partners in Netanyahu's fledgling coalition.

3. How do you defined it as international community? When the majority of middle-east, Asian, Africans, South American countries are not making the statements that recognize Hamas as terrorist, rather a insurgency movement. It's the pressure of big nations too. Even Japan which has nothing to do with the conflict said Hamas is terrorist group when they never step on the conflict.

4. You divert the topic. I mentioned Nelson Mandela was both terrorist and hero by both sides. It's the same as Hamas.

5. Israel does not want to talk with Hamas. Polls show that a majority of the Israelis support negotiations with Hamas, but official Israel refuses to talk to it, at any level. Israel instead launches a worldwide campaign to persuade all countries to boycott Hamas and to join its military and financial blockade on the newly formed Hamas government.

I'd like to talk about the solution as a healthy discussion to end the conflict instead heated it and put more hatred in both sides.



papagolfwhiskey wrote:


Well first off. I meant no disrespect concerning my statement regarding clarity of posts. I really sincerely meant it as an effort to improve our dialogue. Their were passages in that extremely long post that were.... Convoluted, at best and indecipherable (by me at least). If we are going to talk we both need to avoid that as much as possible. (I see we because my own English can wax pretty arcane from time to time as well)

Secondly my comment about "I win" in one of my posts was deliberately provocative and born of the frustration that no one seemed to be reading my posts.

Third I'll be willing to go into details later. But I'm not so much casting blame as attempting to correct the blame that keeps getting cast on the Israelis. Your posts constantly portray them as Aggressors and Criminals with no legal or moral justifications for any of their actions in the last 63 years. Your idea of an acceptable settlement was the one violently rejected by the people you purport to support back in '47. With no way to trust that their opponents are truly willing to adhere to such a deal or that the supposed neutral arbiters have the neutrality, the will, or the strength to actually enforce the deal. I'm sure they'd much rather retain the secure position they've acquired through their own sweat and blood and in spite of, any international assistance they may have received. Are they angels? Heck no. I already conceded that they are and were eager co-belligerents. That fact that they seem to be 'winning' doesn't make the devils either though.

oh and for the record if you translate my Prime Minister's words from Diplomatese to English it basically comes out as...

"Yeah deaths are really bad, we should look into that... sometime..."

Hardly a heartfelt rebuke of the Israelis (and leaving aside the issue of weather they needed one or not)


Firstly, that was my intention from begin with when I participated in this issue a year ago in CR. But rather, people here are just supporting each side they belong to. Well, it's pretty normal to have long writing in ED. The matter is, do we have endurance and will to read it and reply it in the same manner by dressing each points with supported argument. This was nothing compared to someone I knew before and I enjoyed it. If it's too long, I'll make it shorter for you.

Second, you did not to be provocative if you just quoted the post you wanted to refute. We do it all the time here.

Third, I compared the Israel occupation as the same with European aggression to America and Australia when they replaced the native inhabitant. But I recognized the aggression as just when there was no international laws that control about the laws of war and human rights. To be honest, I also recognized the existence of Israel if only they don't continue to blockade another inhabitant. If they can remove the blockade and act accordingly as international laws, it won't be problem. Just like America recognized the rights of black people and South African to lift up the Apartheid system.

Fourth, regardless of the response, the lives of people lost and the raid to Flotilla is illegal said the UN.


1- They don't deny it, doesn't mean they did it on purpose. That's call 'responsibility'.

2- Coalitions, they are a perfectly normal part of a PARLIAMENTRY DEMOCRACY, that doesn't mean the the Shas party controls everything, as you seem to think.

3- The UN declares them to be a terrorist group, mainly because of the fact that they bomb civilians for the shits and giggles.

4- Mandela did not actually went about killing random people to make his point.

5- http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/05/201058123236735895.html Israel opens indirect talks with the PLO, and if Hamas open themselves up to the idea of talks, instead of closing themselves off and declaring Jihad on Israel, maybe they might go somewhere.

10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 6/20/10 , edited 6/20/10

orangeflute wrote:

1- They don't deny it, doesn't mean they did it on purpose. That's call 'responsibility'.

2- Coalitions, they are a perfectly normal part of a PARLIAMENTRY DEMOCRACY, that doesn't mean the the Shas party controls everything, as you seem to think.

3- The UN declares them to be a terrorist group, mainly because of the fact that they bomb civilians for the shits and giggles.

4- Mandela did not actually went about killing random people to make his point.

5- http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/05/201058123236735895.html Israel opens indirect talks with the PLO, and if Hamas open themselves up to the idea of talks, instead of closing themselves off and declaring Jihad on Israel, maybe they might go somewhere.



1. Therefore, it's not accident as you stated before. It's their responsibility for the lost of lives in that school.

2. Coalitions can be achieved if the condition fulfilled. We can assume Shas siding with Likud with the condition. And Netanyahu had fulfilled the condition so far.

3. UN also declares Israel violate many international laws and breaches the Geneva Convention too. Both are wrong, no one should biased in this matter.

4. However, he was recognized as terrorist, even he didn't do anything. Which means, Israel also terrorist for bombing civilians too.

5. Hamas once offer Israel truce talks, (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1219/p99s01-duts.html) And currently, Israel rejects call to talks with hamas. (http://jta.org/news/article/2010/05/13/2394787/israel-rejects-call-to-talk-with-hamas). PLO is no different than Hamas, it was being recognized as terrorist group by United States Congress d under the Anti-Terrorism Act 1987 in 2004.

Once again, I didn't intend to say who is wrong or right entirely. Both are wrong and both has rights to live in that lands as well. If they can negotiate with peace deals that benefit both sides, then I hope the conflict will stop. It's our concern as well, that's why I offer my solutions here as my intention is to stop the conflict not add up the hatred.
1394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 6/20/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


orangeflute wrote:

1- They don't deny it, doesn't mean they did it on purpose. That's call 'responsibility'.

2- Coalitions, they are a perfectly normal part of a PARLIAMENTRY DEMOCRACY, that doesn't mean the the Shas party controls everything, as you seem to think.

3- The UN declares them to be a terrorist group, mainly because of the fact that they bomb civilians for the shits and giggles.

4- Mandela did not actually went about killing random people to make his point.

5- http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2010/05/201058123236735895.html Israel opens indirect talks with the PLO, and if Hamas open themselves up to the idea of talks, instead of closing themselves off and declaring Jihad on Israel, maybe they might go somewhere.



1. Therefore, it's not accident as you stated before. It's their responsibility for the lost of lives in that school.

2. Coalitions can be achieved if the condition fulfilled. We can assume Shas siding with Likud with the condition. And Netanyahu had fulfilled the condition so far.

3. UN also declares Israel violate many international laws and breaches the Geneva Convention too. Both are wrong, no one should biased in this matter.

4. However, he was recognized as terrorist, even he didn't do anything. Which means, Israel also terrorist for bombing civilians too.

5. Hamas once offer Israel truce talks, (http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/1219/p99s01-duts.html) And currently, Israel rejects call to talks with hamas. (http://jta.org/news/article/2010/05/13/2394787/israel-rejects-call-to-talk-with-hamas). PLO is no different than Hamas, it was being recognized as terrorist group by United States Congress d under the Anti-Terrorism Act 1987 in 2004.

Once again, I didn't intend to say who is wrong or right entirely. Both are wrong and both has rights to live in that lands as well. If they can negotiate with peace deals that benefit both sides, then I hope the conflict will stop. It's our concern as well, that's why I offer my solutions here as my intention is to stop the conflict not add up the hatred.


1- In your narrow world, if you acidentally hit a man with your car, and you take responcibility for it, you are guilty of attempted homocide.

2- And now you understand the concept of democracy, so what is the objection? They have condition that they want fulfilled, Shas has plans they want implemented, so as to get it going, they agree on certain principals that should be met by thier coalition.

3- Nobody's perfect. I am not saying that Israel is always right, just saying it is not always wrong, which is what your opinion is thus far.

4- Only by the Apartheid government, whereas they are recognised by an unbias body of various nations.

5- The first was three years ago, and the second, if you read my post, from Al Jezeera, you will see that Hamas declared that they will not 'surrender more land', that is to say, negotiate. If they, I don't know, lay arms down, stop attacking civilians, &c., maybe.

You claim to be unbias, yet you have maintain a very clear position, Israel is an oppressor, an imperialist nation hell bent on killing all Moslems, and controlled by some wicked Cabal of Hasidic bigots.
1394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 6/20/10
Ryutai-Desk, I shall give you one thing, this argument is actually much more productive than my previous one with Mr Jews-are-controlling-the-world-ahhh!.
67725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 6/21/10 , edited 6/21/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:






Firstly, that was my intention from begin with when I participated in this issue a year ago in CR. But rather, people here are just supporting each side they belong to. Well, it's pretty normal to have long writing in ED. The matter is, do we have endurance and will to read it and reply it in the same manner by dressing each points with supported argument. This was nothing compared to someone I knew before and I enjoyed it. If it's too long, I'll make it shorter for you.

Second, you did not to be provocative if you just quoted the post you wanted to refute. We do it all the time here.

Third, I compared the Israel occupation as the same with European aggression to America and Australia when they replaced the native inhabitant. But I recognized the aggression as just when there was no international laws that control about the laws of war and human rights. To be honest, I also recognized the existence of Israel if only they don't continue to blockade another inhabitant. If they can remove the blockade and act accordingly as international laws, it won't be problem. Just like America recognized the rights of black people and South African to lift up the Apartheid system.

Fourth, regardless of the response, the lives of people lost and the raid to Flotilla is illegal said the UN.


First, My comments about length and clarity were two separate issues. When you address three separate posts by two separate posters in one lengthy post there remains a possibility something might slip through the cracks. I find it ironic that you talk of thoroughness and endurance when you have basically told me you don't look at posts that aren't tagged to you. Me, I do my best to read EVERY post.

The Clarity issue is one I hesitate to bring up because I suspect it revolves around English not being your mother tongue. You do far better in English than I do in the only other language I know. I applaud your skill. However, sometimes your word choices and sentence structure are confusing. from time to time I may ask you to clarify a point you make. I'm not trying to be an ass. When I make such a request I'm trying to make sure I understand the point. I usually want to be on the same page with some one before I "tee off" on them.

Third you need to clarify this point. are you implying the The US shouldn't have been recognised as a country if still had codified racism or South Africa would have been excluded from the UN and treated as non-existent until they ended apartheid. Why can't you recognised some form of Israeli state as a legal entity, THEN argue about the legality of that enties actions? or the legality of the size and shape of it's borders. Why is it all or nothing?

Well... Fourth, why bring up the Canadian PM's response as if it supported your argument then? If you want to say it's Illegal fine. If you're trying to prove that Canada suddenly hates Israel over this event. I'm sorry I don't buy it.
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 6/21/10

orangeflute wrote:

1- In your narrow world, if you acidentally hit a man with your car, and you take responcibility for it, you are guilty of attempted homocide.

2- And now you understand the concept of democracy, so what is the objection? They have condition that they want fulfilled, Shas has plans they want implemented, so as to get it going, they agree on certain principals that should be met by thier coalition.

3- Nobody's perfect. I am not saying that Israel is always right, just saying it is not always wrong, which is what your opinion is thus far.

4- Only by the Apartheid government, whereas they are recognised by an unbias body of various nations.

5- The first was three years ago, and the second, if you read my post, from Al Jezeera, you will see that Hamas declared that they will not 'surrender more land', that is to say, negotiate. If they, I don't know, lay arms down, stop attacking civilians, &c., maybe.

You claim to be unbias, yet you have maintain a very clear position, Israel is an oppressor, an imperialist nation hell bent on killing all Moslems, and controlled by some wicked Cabal of Hasidic bigots.


1. So if an army killed a lot of civilians, they're not responsible? I know a lot of war being played by big nations and they never been charged with crime of killing innocents until now. In your country, killing everyone who oppose America is justice, throughout history.

2. Which means they have agreement between 2 parties and the Orthodox Jews get their share in government. We know what's their objective, they don't want to live alongside Palestinians. And the Orthodox has power to do that.

3. Which means Hamas is not always wrong, not always right too. Both should receives same reaction. Meanwhile, you love to say Hamas is terrorist who love to kill and doesn't want to negotiate, everything is Hamas's fault. That's your opinion in this entire argument. Both killing civilians, both are wrong. At the same time, both are right. That's my stance from begin with.

4. Apartheid governments were the one who have bright skin. All nations who support Apartheid government are recognized any activist that wanted to take their rights as terrorist. Which means those countries saying, Martin luther King and Mahatma Gandhi are terrorist as well for became opposition to the country;s government, as a result of H.R. 4239, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. It comes down to perception or duality. One country's terrorist, is another country's hero.

5. You mean, Hamas and Palestinians obliged to give their territory? It's like saying Taiwan is part of China without question. If Israel stop the blockade, give the rights to Palestinians and negotiate, maybe.

If you really read my post without judging me to be pro-hamas, then you won't find me saying Israel as you said. Both has rights to live together. How many times you said I'm bias when you justified all Israel actions as they destroying school and houses?




papagolfwhiskey wrote:

First, My comments about length and clarity were two separate issues. When you address three separate posts by two separate posters in one lengthy post there remains a possibility something might slip through the cracks. I find it ironic that you talk of thoroughness and endurance when you have basically told me you don't look at posts that aren't tagged to you. Me, I do my best to read EVERY post.

The Clarity issue is one I hesitate to bring up because I suspect it revolves around English not being your mother tongue. You do far better in English than I do in the only other language I know. I applaud your skill. However, sometimes your word choices and sentence structure are confusing. from time to time I may ask you to clarify a point you make. I'm not trying to be an ass. When I make such a request I'm trying to make sure I understand the point. I usually want to be on the same page with some one before I "tee off" on them.

Third you need to clarify this point. are you implying the The US shouldn't have been recognised as a country if still had codified racism or South Africa would have been excluded from the UN and treated as non-existent until they ended apartheid. Why can't you recognised some form of Israeli state as a legal entity, THEN argue about the legality of that enties actions? or the legality of the size and shape of it's borders. Why is it all or nothing?

Well... Fourth, why bring up the Canadian PM's response as if it supported your argument then? If you want to say it's Illegal fine. If you're trying to prove that Canada suddenly hates Israel over this event. I'm sorry I don't buy it.


First, as I said, it's normal to have a post to reply 2 different posts or even three and four in Extended Discussion. Did you find the 'something might slip through cracks'? I read post through-fully when it caught my attention. I won't spend all my time to read all post that has no point, moreover the random posts that always pop-up every time. Second, just let me know if you don't clear about something in my post.

Third, in that case, US might be considered as a nation by some, but not all, like Kosovo. Moreover, Americans would most likely not be recognized as nation in South America, Africa, and Asia countries if they still implement slavery. It's about human rights, that's what happened in Israel too. They don't recognized the rights of their neighbor to live with blockade. UN respond the blockade as inhuman too. The same response to America and Australia if they still have slavery.

Fourth, we had already talk about this in different thread. http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-614796/canada-and-israel/ I didn't even care if Canada respond to the incident or not. It just the raid to Freedom Flotilla is unacceptable by international community.

1394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M
Offline
Posted 6/21/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:


orangeflute wrote:

1- In your narrow world, if you acidentally hit a man with your car, and you take responcibility for it, you are guilty of attempted homocide.

2- And now you understand the concept of democracy, so what is the objection? They have condition that they want fulfilled, Shas has plans they want implemented, so as to get it going, they agree on certain principals that should be met by thier coalition.

3- Nobody's perfect. I am not saying that Israel is always right, just saying it is not always wrong, which is what your opinion is thus far.

4- Only by the Apartheid government, whereas they are recognised by an unbias body of various nations.

5- The first was three years ago, and the second, if you read my post, from Al Jezeera, you will see that Hamas declared that they will not 'surrender more land', that is to say, negotiate. If they, I don't know, lay arms down, stop attacking civilians, &c., maybe.

You claim to be unbias, yet you have maintain a very clear position, Israel is an oppressor, an imperialist nation hell bent on killing all Moslems, and controlled by some wicked Cabal of Hasidic bigots.


1. So if an army killed a lot of civilians, they're not responsible? I know a lot of war being played by big nations and they never been charged with crime of killing innocents until now. In your country, killing everyone who oppose America is justice, throughout history.

2. Which means they have agreement between 2 parties and the Orthodox Jews get their share in government. We know what's their objective, they don't want to live alongside Palestinians. And the Orthodox has power to do that.

3. Which means Hamas is not always wrong, not always right too. Both should receives same reaction. Meanwhile, you love to say Hamas is terrorist who love to kill and doesn't want to negotiate, everything is Hamas's fault. That's your opinion in this entire argument. Both killing civilians, both are wrong. At the same time, both are right. That's my stance from begin with.

4. Apartheid governments were the one who have bright skin. All nations who support Apartheid government are recognized any activist that wanted to take their rights as terrorist. Which means those countries saying, Martin luther King and Mahatma Gandhi are terrorist as well for became opposition to the country;s government, as a result of H.R. 4239, the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act. It comes down to perception or duality. One country's terrorist, is another country's hero.

5. You mean, Hamas and Palestinians obliged to give their territory? It's like saying Taiwan is part of China without question. If Israel stop the blockade, give the rights to Palestinians and negotiate, maybe.

If you really read my post without judging me to be pro-hamas, then you won't find me saying Israel as you said. Both has rights to live together. How many times you said I'm bias when you justified all Israel actions as they destroying school and houses?




papagolfwhiskey wrote:

First, My comments about length and clarity were two separate issues. When you address three separate posts by two separate posters in one lengthy post there remains a possibility something might slip through the cracks. I find it ironic that you talk of thoroughness and endurance when you have basically told me you don't look at posts that aren't tagged to you. Me, I do my best to read EVERY post.

The Clarity issue is one I hesitate to bring up because I suspect it revolves around English not being your mother tongue. You do far better in English than I do in the only other language I know. I applaud your skill. However, sometimes your word choices and sentence structure are confusing. from time to time I may ask you to clarify a point you make. I'm not trying to be an ass. When I make such a request I'm trying to make sure I understand the point. I usually want to be on the same page with some one before I "tee off" on them.

Third you need to clarify this point. are you implying the The US shouldn't have been recognised as a country if still had codified racism or South Africa would have been excluded from the UN and treated as non-existent until they ended apartheid. Why can't you recognised some form of Israeli state as a legal entity, THEN argue about the legality of that enties actions? or the legality of the size and shape of it's borders. Why is it all or nothing?

Well... Fourth, why bring up the Canadian PM's response as if it supported your argument then? If you want to say it's Illegal fine. If you're trying to prove that Canada suddenly hates Israel over this event. I'm sorry I don't buy it.


First, as I said, it's normal to have a post to reply 2 different posts or even three and four in Extended Discussion. Did you find the 'something might slip through cracks'? I read post through-fully when it caught my attention. I won't spend all my time to read all post that has no point, moreover the random posts that always pop-up every time. Second, just let me know if you don't clear about something in my post.

Third, in that case, US might be considered as a nation by some, but not all, like Kosovo. Moreover, Americans would most likely not be recognized as nation in South America, Africa, and Asia countries if they still implement slavery. It's about human rights, that's what happened in Israel too. They don't recognized the rights of their neighbor to live with blockade. UN respond the blockade as inhuman too. The same response to America and Australia if they still have slavery.

Fourth, we had already talk about this in different thread. http://www.crunchyroll.com/forumtopic-614796/canada-and-israel/ I didn't even care if Canada respond to the incident or not. It just the raid to Freedom Flotilla is unacceptable by international community.



1- That is the point, Israel has taken responsibility for their mistake ie admitting that they have accidentally kill civilians. You are trying to make them a villian for it.

2- They have some power. Just as how Israeli-Arabs also have power, and Israeli-Communists have power, having members in the Knesset. The Orthodox Jews do not controll everything, no matter how much you wish such were the case.

3- Hamas is an internationally recognised terrorist organisation, but they do talk sense rarely. I shall concede thus.

4- No, not when you openly kill civilians for the sake of killing civilians, intimidating opposition within, instigate suicide bombing, &c. for the sake of inspiring terror. Hence, terrorist. The PLO have open talks with Israel, have ceased their operations, and still fight for the 'freedom' of the palestinian people, they don't go around killing.

5- One, Israel is not asking to evict Palestinians out of their land. Also, Taiwan is part of China, that's why it is under the flag of the REPUBLIC OF CHINA, founded by Non-Taiwanese Dr. Sun Yat-sen. It is not some seperate political entity, its population is composed of 90% ethnic Han Chinese, it is culturally Chinese, and its government claims to be the legitimate government of all of China. So, you are wrong on both points.

If you don't want to be judged as pro-Hamas, then you should stop acting thusly.
10652 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / Indonesia Raya
Offline
Posted 6/23/10 , edited 6/23/10

orangeflute wrote:

1- That is the point, Israel has taken responsibility for their mistake ie admitting that they have accidentally kill civilians. You are trying to make them a villian for it.

2- They have some power. Just as how Israeli-Arabs also have power, and Israeli-Communists have power, having members in the Knesset. The Orthodox Jews do not controll everything, no matter how much you wish such were the case.

3- Hamas is an internationally recognised terrorist organisation, but they do talk sense rarely. I shall concede thus.

4- No, not when you openly kill civilians for the sake of killing civilians, intimidating opposition within, instigate suicide bombing, &c. for the sake of inspiring terror. Hence, terrorist. The PLO have open talks with Israel, have ceased their operations, and still fight for the 'freedom' of the palestinian people, they don't go around killing.

5- One, Israel is not asking to evict Palestinians out of their land. Also, Taiwan is part of China, that's why it is under the flag of the REPUBLIC OF CHINA, founded by Non-Taiwanese Dr. Sun Yat-sen. It is not some seperate political entity, its population is composed of 90% ethnic Han Chinese, it is culturally Chinese, and its government claims to be the legitimate government of all of China. So, you are wrong on both points.

If you don't want to be judged as pro-Hamas, then you should stop acting thusly.


1. Hamas also often admitting their acts of firing rockets. What's the difference? You are trying to make them a villain for it.

2. I don't have problem with coalition in general. However, the party that has allied with the ruling party have ideology that might bring unfairness to others. If you have Socialism ideology in Democrat party, would Americans agree? If Communism allied with Republican to gain presidency, would Americans agree? If the party doesn't considered themselves as the most superior human beings on the earth and claim the area as their promised lands, I don't have problem with that.

3. Which international? The western countries which rules UN or small countries which do not have same rights as developed countries in UN? There are 2 types of countries on this world. The one which sided with western or US, and the other one which doesn't. Brazil, Turkey, Venezuela, Iran, Afghanistan, Russia, Egypt, Lebanon, Norway etc. do not recognized Hamas as terrorist group. They are recognized as insurgency groups, the same as... Khmer in Cambodia, FARC in Colombia, RN in Greece, Tamil Tiger in Sri Lanka, IRA in Irlandia, ALIR in Rwanda, Basque or ETA in Spain, GAM in Indonesia, etc etc...

4. As I said, that's what will happen if you have 2 forces confront each other. If Hamas is terrorist, then Israel is terrorist too. If Taliban is terrorist, US army is terrorist too. All of them are included in your category.

5. Do you know the movement of Zionism? Their goal is to achieved Jewish State. We can see their activities to achieved their goals. Do you really know about Taiwan? United States presidents Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush have been known to have referred to Taiwan as a country during their terms of office. If Taiwan is a part of China with 'Officially acknowledged worldwide', why China aim their thousands of missile to Taiwan? What flag did Taiwan shown in Beijing Olympic?

The China or People Republic of China government has issued triggers for an immediate war with Taiwan or Republic of China, most notably via its controversial Anti-Secession Law of 2005, thus both nation could be in war anytime. These conditions are:
- if events occur leading to the separation of Taiwan from China in any name, or
- if a major event occurs which would lead to Taiwan's separation from China, or
- if all possibility of peaceful unification is lost.

If you really read my post without judging me to be pro-hamas in the firs place, then you won't find me saying Israel as you said. Both has rights to live together. How many times you said I'm bias when you justified all Israel actions as they destroying school and houses? Who are really biased when you said the rockets fired from Hamas is terror, while the rockets fired from Israel is 'accident'?
67725 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
47 / F / Center of the Uni...
Offline
Posted 6/23/10

Ryutai-Desk wrote:



If you really read my post without judging me to be pro-hamas in the firs place, then you won't find me saying Israel as you said. Both has rights to live together. How many times you said I'm bias when you justified all Israel actions as they destroying school and houses? Who are really biased when you said the rockets fired from Hamas is terror, while the rockets fired from Israel is 'accident'?


On this single point I will opine.
Hamas has (and not just with it's rocket attacks) deliberately targeted the civilian populace. deliberately targeted schools and hospitals. They CHOSE those targets. That's Terrorism.

Isreal is saying "We fired back at where we THOUGHT the rockets were coming from and we hit a school instead. Our bad." That's why that's NOT terror.

It's a weak cowardly terrorist tactic (and a violation of the Geneva convention) to hide your combatants among the civil population they are supposed to protect. Hamas not only does that, but it does it deliberately so that it can claim martyrs and lay charges of atrocity at Israel's door.



First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.