Jump to content

FUCK ISRAEL!!!!


Rumble In the Jungle

Recommended Posts

No I am not. It was the best deal they will ever be offered. I am not picking a side just stating a fact. Neither side trusts each other, never will and there will never be any agreement unless it is just for short term political reasons.

The goal of every Arab nation is the destruction of Israel. It isn't a secret. The idea of peace in the Middle East is one of naive fools who have zero understanding of history, particularly the Sunni vs Shia issue.

Peace is not possible until one branch of Islam is obliterated and the Jews are removed from what is considered very holy ground by both branches of Islam.

Well, yes, you are mistaken with respect to your interpretation of Olso. Arafat didn't reject the accord for starters. And it wasn't the Palestinians alone who killed it eventually. The extremist PFLP and Hamas on one side and the extremists loonies in Israel on the other side killed that peace effort in the long run. (And that includes the crowd for which Netanyahu is the mouthpiece.) And by killed, I mean literally in the case of Rabin--as was mentioned earlier in this thread and written about in detail by me here on this forum some years ago.

 

Christ, I wish people would be more faithful to the specificity of events as they occur. There is plenty of room for debate within the confines of events as they actually happened without all this bandying about in vapid generalities.

 

Do your ---------------- history, people, or at least adopt a posture of inquisitive moderation if you don't know the nuts and bolts of a given set of events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, yes, you are mistaken with respect to your interpretation of Olso. Arafat didn't reject the accord for starters. And it wasn't the Palestinians alone who killed it eventually. The extremist PFLP and Hamas on one side and the extremists loonies in Israel on the other side killed that peace effort in the long run. (And that includes the crowd for which Netanyahu is the mouthpiece.) And by killed, I mean literally in the case of Rabin--as was mentioned earlier in this thread and written about in detail by me here on this forum some years ago.
 
Christ, I wish people would be more faithful to the specificity of events as they occur. There is plenty of room for debate within the confines of events as they actually happened without all this bandying about in vapid generalities.
 
Do your fucking history, people, or at least adopt a posture of inquisitive moderation if you don't know the nuts and bolts of a given set of events.


Arafat was stuck between a rock and a hard place. Had the best deal on the table but the ultra radicals basically forced his hand. If he had agreed to the deal, the international community would have brought great pressure on Israel but I doubt he would have survived.

The Israelis may have broken under the weight of the international community but that is just a guess.

No matter. New players involved now with no intention of even talking about a solution which involves Israel's continued existence.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

in the case of Rabin--as was mentioned earlier in this thread and written about in detail by me here on this forum some years ago.

 

 

Link?

 

And while you're here, do you see a realistic solution?  "Old" Jerusalem is already one of those UNESCO "world heritage" sites but the idea of it no longer being part of Israel or any other nation is appealing, at least to an outsider that feels it's nothing more to me than, how did I put it.. "sand and goat shit"? (I do appreciate the history of the place of course, it just doesn't hold any particular personal significance to me.)

 

Idea being to remove as much ideology as possible from the whole mess so it can be resolved as more of a humanitarian issue instead of some epic religious battle etc.  Probably unrealistic as can be but so long as it's a "Holy" war over "Holy" land there's not much incentive to end it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Link?

 

And while you're here, do you see a realistic solution?  "Old" Jerusalem is already one of those UNESCO "world heritage" sites but the idea of it no longer being part of Israel or any other nation is appealing, at least to an outsider that feels it's nothing more to me than, how did I put it.. "sand and goat shit"? (I do appreciate the history of the place of course, it just doesn't hold any particular personal significance to me.)

 

Idea being to remove as much ideology as possible from the whole mess so it can be resolved as more of a humanitarian issue instead of some epic religious battle etc.  Probably unrealistic as can be but so long as it's a "Holy" war over "Holy" land there's not much incentive to end it.

Ideology is why much of the world is a mess.

 

Besides the Ukraine situation, what other significant hot spot in the world isn't about religious ideology?

 

Egypt and Syria in the early stages were not but it sure didn't take long for the well financed religious radicals to arrive at the scene and use their Total War tactics to take over. 

 

As I have said, when one side is willing to sacrifice children, summary execute prisoners, murder the leaders of smaller units not 'loyal" enough and utterly throw any notion of the Geneva Convention out the window, the moderates in their ranks stand no chance of their voices being heard.    

 

Now, with ISIS having great success operating at will and in the open, the chances of any agreement between Palestine and Israel (not that I ever expected one) is impossible.  

 

The losers of course are those in Gaza and the West Bank who just want to earn a living, raise their children and live in peace.   Even if Israel were pushed into the sea, what type of 'government" do you honestly think the ISIS or Hamas crowd would install?  I imagine the people would be far worse off but hey, they will have their Palestine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG hate to laugh but its a laugh of sadness, I'm not a big John Stewart fan but he is right,  where in the hell are they supposed to evacuate to? 

 

 

I'm a huge Jon Stewart fan but IMHO Real Time with Bill Maher came closest to the truth last night when Bill described Palestinians as...professional refugees.

 

Ex-Congresswoman Jane Harmon then quoted Charles Krauthammer's remark about how Isreal uses a missle system to protect it's people while Hamas uses people to protect a missle system.

 

Finally, a panelist whose name I've forgotten noted how Hamas's charter still lists the destruction of Israel as it's top priority....which is probably the right message to send if all you are is a terrorist organization.

 

But that said it's probably not so good if you're the fairly elected leader of a people who claim all they want is peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 I apologize if children being killed makes me a little upset....I wish it made more people upset. 

 

 

I wish it made the leaders of Hamas upset.

 

Instead, they use the images and casualty figures for fundraising, recruitment, and propoganda.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's not equivalent unless you can produce evidence of native Americans launching rockets across the Oklahoma border.

 

 

You seem really hung up on rockets being fired from Palestine and not at all interested in the rockets fired from Israeli attack helicopters.  I wonder why that is? Like I said before, the IDF has killed more civilians in the past 24 hours than every rocket ever fired from Gaza.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

It's not equivalent unless you can produce evidence of native Americans launching rockets across the Oklahoma border.

They didn't have rockets then but Native Americans attacked settlers pretty  frequently,  if they would have had rockets I'm sure they would have used them,  it is the equivalent,  used to refer to the Indians as savages,  blamed them even though we were the ones taking their land and displacing and murdering them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm telling you, these territorial squabbles can really get out of hand. But still, you have to fight the fight for the sake of justice and that ever elusive harmony--which'll come any day now. I'll give you an example.

 

Sorry to hear about your cat problems.

 

However, I wonder if a better smale-scale comparison would be the recent standoff between Cliven Bundy and the heavily armed people who attempted to support him. As I recall those supporters threatened to kill BLM employees and law enforcement officers, but only after placing their wives and children in front of their own firing positions. Bundy aside, the goal of most of the protesters seemed obvious enough, to either make a powerful enemy appear weak if it chose to do nothing OR failing that provoke a bloody confrontation that could be used to show how heavy-handed and kill crazy the other side could be. Happily, cooler heads prevailed and nobody got shot, at least not until months later when two of the so-called true believers who had been at Bundy's ranch attempted to jump-start their revolution by killing 2 police officers who were eating lunch.  

--------- was firmly on the side of Bundy and the supporters who hid behind women and children, he claimed the government was guilty of trying to throw Bundy off of land he didn't own, and he claimed Americans were blind to what was occuring because only Fox News had the balls to cover the story. Those who didn't watch Fox were blind, he claimed.

 

Sound familiar?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They didn't have rockets then but Native Americans attacked settlers pretty  frequently,  if they would have had rockets I'm sure they would have used them,  it is the equivalent,  used to refer to the Indians as savages,  blamed them even though we were the ones taking their land and displacing and murdering them

 

No, it's not equivalant because native Americans stopped fighting back more than 100 years ago, thereby ending the killing between the two sides.

 

By comparison, Hamas claims it will never stop fighting until Israel disolves itself, a non-starter in every peace negotiation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

No, it's not equivalant because native Americans stopped fighting back more than 100 years ago, thereby ending the killing between the two sides.

 

By comparison, Hamas claims it will never stop fighting until Israel disolves itself, a non-starter in every peace negotiation.

Yeah because they were annihilated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HairOnFire straight up ---------! You are ---------. I have no need to explain ---------to you because you are a zionist ---------! ---------! And Oldschooler ---------TOO!

 

Imagine being stuck in a small town by the millions with barb wires all around your city. You can't get in. You can't get out. No medicine or doctors allowed in. Water supplies aren't enough if any. No food coming in or out. You are only given 2 miles of ocean space to fish and on top of it they are throwing chemicals in your water purposely to poison your catches. They dump all their sewage in your town and call it water. Basically at some point anyone will snap! I have families there that are dying and I got pieces of --------- on here saying fuck them or Israel has the right! --------- ! If they are going to kill us then fuck it, FIRE SOME FUCKING ROCKETS THEN. Someone can only get poked so many times and starved before they snap. Now tell me who the real terrorist is --------- ! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anyway. What I am much more sure of is this; fuck the attitude that an oppressed people should just bend over and take it because the oppressor has the big guns. WTF is that noise? Do any of you really believe that? Frankly I can not imagine having grown up in one of th occupied territories and not fighting the occupiers with everything I had. If that was pissant rockets that I knew damn well weren't going to do much of anything, oh well, it's all I've got.

And if you don't identify more with some 10-year old kid throwing rocks at a fucking tank than the sonofabitch using that tank to flatten the kids home because his dad or brother or uncle had the audacity to dig a tunnel for protection and maybe smuggle in some clean water (ffs), or hell yeah a gun or two, then I don't think we're ever going to see eye to eye on any of this. Forget the "terrorist" fear-mongering slurs, forget that they seem foreign and strange and you don't agree with their culture or religion any more than they do ours and put yourself in their shoes for a second as a human, under those conditions, for your entire life with little hope of any of it changing, not just for you, but for your kids or grandkids... I'd be launching god damned bottle rockets if that's all I could find, and hopefully so would you.

 

Not going to jump into this other than to say, that is exactly the argument used against people who say their second amendment rights are about protection from tyrannical government. How many of you have said that there is no way to win against the military so you might as well give up your guns?

 

 

Carry on.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HairOnFire straight up --------- ! You are ---------. I have no need to explain --------- to you because you are a Zionist --------- ! --------- ! And Oldschooler --------- TOO!
 
 
 
 
Imagine being stuck in a small town by the millions with barb wires all around your city. You can't get in. You can't get out. No medicine or doctors allowed in. Water supplies aren't enough if any. No food coming in or out. You are only given 2 miles of ocean space to fish and on top of it they are throwing chemicals in your water purposely to poison your catches. They dump all their sewage in your town and call it water. Basically at some point anyone will snap! I have families there that are dying and I got pieces of shit on here saying fuck them or Israel has the right! --------- ! If they are going to kill us then fuck it, FIRE SOME FUCKING ROCKETS THEN. Someone can only get poked so many times and starved before they snap. Now tell me who the real terrorist is --------- ! 


Counterproductive... :mellow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HairOnFire straight up --------- ! You are ---------. I have no need to explain --------- to you because you are a zionist --------- ! --------- ! And Oldschooler --------- TOO!

 

So predictable.

 

 

 

 Basically at some point anyone will snap!  

 

You're living proof of that, I admit.  

 

 

 

 If they are going to kill us then fuck it, FIRE SOME FUCKING ROCKETS THEN.

 

Makes perfect sense.

 

After all, you've got your pride to think of.

 

Besides, what could go wrong?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you need to be grateful that they decided to take a poo in your house. Perhaps you should put the cats in shelters along a small strip of your yard. I think they'd be happy then....

Lol. I guess this comment and others is proof that I'm a shitty parable (and fiction) writer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No matter. New players involved now with no intention of even talking about a solution which involves Israel's continued existence.

I tend to agree with part of this idea, keeping in mind that low intensity warfare often generates pejoratives like "terrorist" etc... However, the devolving shift towards extremist barbarism in recent decades is not solely an Arab matter or a Muslim faith matter. The general trend in religiosity has been towards reductivist theology recently and this applies to all three of the western monotheisms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Link?

 

And while you're here, do you see a realistic solution?  "Old" Jerusalem is already one of those UNESCO "world heritage" sites but the idea of it no longer being part of Israel or any other nation is appealing, at least to an outsider that feels it's nothing more to me than, how did I put it.. "sand and goat shit"? (I do appreciate the history of the place of course, it just doesn't hold any particular personal significance to me.)

 

Idea being to remove as much ideology as possible from the whole mess so it can be resolved as more of a humanitarian issue instead of some epic religious battle etc.  Probably unrealistic as can be but so long as it's a "Holy" war over "Holy" land there's not much incentive to end it.

I suppose if you did a search it might turn up although I think that part of the database has been lost. I want to say I wrote a bit about Rabin when Lawman was around. Or, perhaps it was when that troll from Boston popped in to carry Zionist water. In any case, it has been quite some time.

 

It has been my belief that any "solution" to Israeli/Palestinian relations (and including other regional players like Jordan and Egypt) has to contain a large component of shared economic prosperity. Folks tend not to kill each other if they can flourish with each other. In fact, normalization of relations between Egypt and Israel sort of proves this point.

 

The sticking points are two as I see it: On one hand, Israel's right to nationhood must be affirmed despite all the contentious history about origins, etc... It's a geopolitical fact now. In fact, Arafat and the PLO acknowledged this at Oslo because they officially recognized the formal existence of the State of Israel.

 

On the other hand (and more or less simultaneously), the hard-liners in Israel need to be stripped of some of their power because although occasionally hard-liners like Rabin do "see the light" we see what happens to those folks when they have a change of policy (if not heart.) A viable Palestinian state needs to also be established. And by that I mean something more than this current farce of a pastiche which Israel current "offers."

 

Jerusalem as an open city has an appeal but it seems to be mostly an ideal and not an approachable goal at this time.

 

The definition of ideology that I find most sympathetic (and correct) is the Marxian one: An ideology is a pathological belief system. Hence, it isn't the fact of a belief system that is the problem, it's the pathology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Not going to jump into this other than to say, that is exactly the argument used against people who say their second amendment rights are about protection from tyrannical government. How many of you have said that there is no way to win against the military so you might as well give up your guns?

 

 

Carry on.

I actually sort of agree with your idea as a matter of political philosophy. Except I am aware that there is a distinction between current right-wing hand-wringing about the so-called tyranny of government here in the U.S. and the actual, tragic, localized apocalypse that is Palestine now. One is a completely (and with reference to my previous post) pathological fantasy and the other is oh-so-sadly-real.

 

Anyhow: Hobby? Meet Horse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Khat;

 

Sympathy and solidarity, brother.

 

So sorry to know that your family still suffers from such injustice. It angers me a great deal, too, that so many folks don't seem to understand the nitty-gritty of the matter. Real people and real harm are often too hard for some folks to comprehend in any meaningful way. That said, I do hold out hope that those who "don't get it" really would "get it" if they had more of their own personal life at stake.

 

tl;dr Even ignorant folk have feelings. But I agree with you in this--fuck 'em if they get in the way of a solution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...