Womd

[1stdeadeye]

Originally posted by Collegeboy

Justifying is no better then glorifying. You are still saying it is alright!

[-Carnifex-]

Should I stay or should I go now? If I go there will be troubaaalll, if I say there will be double. So you gotta let me know, should I stay or should I go?

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
I have countless times told you both, that my post here are not glorifying the actions of the terrorist

No, but as dead eye said you are justifying their murdereous actions, which is just as bad.



YOu are saying that thoug. You're costant claim is that nothing can be done until Israel forks over to every demand the Palestinians have. That clearly is intended to cast blame.

My post here is to try to get you both and others to look at the situation through an unbiased and an open mind.

You can be accused of a lot of things, being unbiased is not one. I am biased in this situation, and I freely admit it. When given a choice between a democracy that practices religious tolerance and restraint versus a regime that condones murder and terrorism and religious intolerance I choose the former. I don't even need to hear the rest of the story to know who's side I'm on.

Do that and you will understand the situation more then you do now.

I fully understand the situation, the various party's strenths and weaknesses, and how the situation has evolved over time.

If you refuse to, you will continue to have biased views towards the area,

Ok, I have no problem with that.

and those views will continue to send bad feelings to the people we need to trust us.

Why do I care if they trust us? They bomb children and gun down innocents in the steet while people like you try to tell me it's legitimate. I don't need, or frankly care for, their trust.

These feelings are what leads the populace of countries to rise up against our policies, and turns people to hate you.

Let them hate me. I choose good over evil, if they have a problem with that I could care less.

It is interesting to know that during the Soviet Union, most Soviets did not hate the US; they actually secretly looked up to it. But now, because of the recent actions taken by the US, they have more distrust in the present administration then under the Cold War.

Whatever CB. I assume you can back that statement up with more then vague talk of feelings.

No, Israel has never been able to fully give away their land. There was a period in which attacks on both sides had basically stopped, and nothing during that time period happened to change the lives of the Palestinians for the good.

The Israelis were activly withdrawing from the disputed territory and had released dozens (if not hundreds) of prisoners.

They still lived in their camps,

Well I'm sorry Israel's instant suburban neighborhood generator wasn't working that day. Next time have patience.

still had to go through check points,

So what? We have to go through check points in air ports, I'm over it. So what a check point?

still were treated like dogs,

You'll back that up with what?

and still had no hopes of a country of their own.

The Israeli government had already committed to recognizing a Palestinian state by a specified time in the Road Map.

And this happened through peaceful measures. Nothing happened.

Plenty happened. The respite was only a few weeks, how much do people think happens in that time? Progress was made and the settlements were being dismanteled.

Now that the infantada has started, the attacks have started, Israel is "willing" to move out of their illegally held land. So tell the Palestinians that those actions do not pay off.

They were moving out of the land. Now that the attacks have started Sharon is prmomising to build more settlements. The Infitada has (as always) moved the Palestinians away from victory, not torwards.

According to the UN, any land that is occupied land is illegal. And since we invaded a foreign country for not following UN resolutions, who are we to say that it is ok not to follow a UN resolution.

I believe that's a general assembly rule, and I believe that that land was seized in an illegal war. I'm all for the rule of law, but the agressors chose war and lost, and that should carry consequences.

Same thing, crime happens here, just as much as terrorist attacks happen over there. You are refusing to see what I am saying, for you are afraid that you will lose respect for the Israelis.

I do see what you're saying, and it's completely without basis and pointless. The one has no bearing on the other, but you're most vaulted moral equivilancy makes you believe otherwise.

Let me ask you something, why should these people turn the terrorist away.

If you have to ask that question then you can no longer claim to not have a bias.

They have saw where peace leads them, they have no army to defend them, they have no airplanes, or bombs to try and when them their freedom. Why should the Palestinians (who for the most majority do not agree with the killing of innocent civilians), turn in the people fighting for them.

Because the terrorists are not fighting for them. They are killing and murdering as a means to kill and murder, not to win a peace. The terrorists take the average person further from their goal, not closer.

That is why you have to make it where Israel is not the one repressing the innocent Palestinians.

They're not

[n]You have to have Israel move out, that in turn pits the innocent Palestinians against the terrorist Palestinians.[/b]

They were moving out. THat the innocents and the terrorists aren't already at odds makes me wonder about calling them innocent in the first place.

You have to give the Palestinians hope for a future, not dismal sorrow.

Israel gave them that, with the US and the UN. The terrorists took it away. If they want it back they'll have to stand up to terrorism.



That's not Israel's intent. Israel's intent is to kill murderers and has nothing to do with the terrorizing, intimdating, or coercing. It specifically targets murderers and then kills them.


One can use that to say the IDF is a terrorist force.

Unbiased people can't, Palestinian sympathizers and apologists can

No it is not the dumbest thing you have ever heard. What good is a judicial system if you do not have trust that they are making right decisions and fair decisions.

When did we start talking about judicial systems? I'm talking about retalliation for acts of war. Since when do two opposing sides of a war have to trust each other to know that retaliation is coming for attacks?

1de. You can not compare a suicide bomber with a bomb being dropped from a plane on top of a building.

Right, the former one is an immoral act of terrorism. The latter a war time response to the former.

They haven't, but they seem good at dropping bombs and shooting missiles into crowded areas of innocents.

You know that the other day the Palestinians shot 8 rockets into Israel, right?

I am not rehashing anything. It was a small group that they shown on TV. Palestinians as a whole, or even 99% of them were not dancing in the street. Just another propaganda that we are forced to believe.

You keep the faith CB

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by aaron_mag
Once again a lively debate between several people becomes CB takes on all comers. Hey Albinonewt and 1stdeadeye....you guys going to comment on my fair and balanced book recommendation???

Hell no. I have enough trouble with Anne Coulter and she A) agrees with me and B) distorts facts (where as Franken makes up lies and THEN distorts them).

I will not be reading Al Franken.

Plus he's not even funny.

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
When I come flat out and say that my views put blame on both sides. And then someone comes out with a posting saying I am pro Palestinian, either they didn't read it, or b, they did not comprehend it.

No, it's that your definition of ubiased differs from everyone else's.

You probably really do think you're being objective, don't you?

[aaron_mag]

Re: Re: Some of you need to read this book

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye


I hate Al Franken. Not for his views. I just don't think he is funny. He did nothing for SNL. This guy's career is based on "Rush Limbaugh is a big fat idiot".

He is about as funny as Joe Piscopo now!

Actually I had never heard of him till I read this book (given to me). I definetely don't think that he is as funny as he obviously thinks he is. Some of the skits that he talks about just seem pretty lame.

His Bush bashing makes me sick. He discusses the hardball politics and name calling of the far right then shows that he can be just as nasty (if a bit more creative). Of course there are other things that I think are pretty accurate.

[-Carnifex-]

Who killed Bambi?!

[Army]

The back and forthing has gone nowhere for a week now. This thread is closed due to lack of anything new being said.

BUT! I do thank all of you for keeping it mostly civil. Very little editing needed to be done, which means you guys CAN carry on a real discussion, with little worry by is Mods.

Thanks again AO. Dave