posted
Guy on right is shooting at guy on left while putting himself in front of baby on right. Goal being to protect baby on right. I can use smaller words if you want.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Guy on right has an absolute moral obligation to pull that trigger, in my opinion. Sorry, baby on left. It was guy on left who killed you. Not guy on right.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'd say it's fairly accurate for the grand majority of Palestine. But not what is going on in Lebanon.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is where Israel has an obligation to survive and tries to save itself from the forces that have sworn to destroy it at any cost.
Posts: 2267 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is being presented as "we have to kill them or they will kill us". There is a third option. I am not saying that it is an acceptable option, but it does exist. "They" would not be trying to kill "us" if "we" were elsewhere.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am not suggesting anything bad happen to them, just that they go elsewhere.
Actually, I am not "suggesting" anything at all except to remind people that there is another option. Again, I didn't say it was an acceptable option. If Israel stopped shooting and left , it would also be over.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Any particular place you're suggesting we go?
Ignoring, of course, the very fact that being forced to leave the Holy Land would actually BE "something bad happening" to us.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
PC: The PURPOSE of Israel is to prevent such a thing from happening again. You can't godwin that.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: This is being presented as "we have to kill them or they will kill us". There is a third option. I am not saying that it is an acceptable option, but it does exist. "They" would not be trying to kill "us" if "we" were elsewhere.
Oh, hell, there are tons of options, in that case. We can kill ourselves like they did on Masada, robbing them of the fun. Or we can kill all of them.
Neither of those is an acceptable choice, either. Right now, we're doing our level best to kill the ones who need killing, and avoid killing others. It'd be a helluva lot easier, and probably would have saved the lives of the Israelis who've died in this war so far, if we just carpet bombed the hell out of them. Almost every Jew who has died in this so far has died for the sake of sparing collateral damage on the Arab side.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: I am not suggesting anything bad happen to them, just that they go elsewhere.
Actually, I am not "suggesting" anything at all except to remind people that there is another option. Again, I didn't say it was an acceptable option. If Israel stopped shooting and left , it would also be over.
It's kind of appalling that you'd even raise it as a theoretical option.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Perhaps this "elsewhere".
quote: Then sending the Arabs elsewhere is a sad necessity.
Nasty comparison. There are numerous Arab countries, including one that is, de facto, a Palestinian country. All we have is our home. Which was our home before the Arabs invaded it, mind you, and which we have never agreed to cede to them.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why? Why is it appalling. And if you can understand why it is appalling, why can't you understand that it appalling for Arabs to be expected to "elsewhere"?
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by kmbboots: Why? Why is it appalling. And if you can understand why it is appalling, why can't you understand that it appalling for Arabs to be expected to "elsewhere"?
There are numerous Arab countries, including one that is, de facto, a Palestinian country. All we have is our home. Which was our home before the Arabs invaded it, mind you, and which we have never agreed to cede to them.
(I cut that and pasted it, because you apparently hadn't read it the first time.)
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
So now it is about who has more right to the real estate. That is more complicated than "we have to kill them or they will kill us".
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: You can't start a fight, (which would have been death for Israel) lose and then demand your land back.
So we're back to "we have to kill them or they will kill us"
Sure they can. They are. So how does that follow. Israel could give up the land. So we are back to "who should have the land?"
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Israel may be the less guilty of the parties, but that is like saying that the Lord's Resistance Army is less guilty than the NKVD.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pel: And what do you have to back up your absurd assertion? Or are you just pontificating from a particular orifice again?
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by The Pixiest: You can't start a fight, (which would have been death for Israel) lose and then demand your land back.
So we're back to "we have to kill them or they will kill us"
Sure they can. They are. So how does that follow. Israel could give up the land.
The fact that you can state this as an option (and think that offering one person a place to stay, much as I appreciate the offer, is an answer to anything) indicates to me that on a very, very basic level, you do not understand.
Mind, I am not in favor of sL's stated solution. But there is only ONE Eretz Yisroel Hakidosha, and we ain't leaving. There are many Arab countries. It is not even an apples-and-oranges comparison.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pel, you're off the deep end. Israel is definitely far more moral than those carrying out terrorist attacks on them. The problem arises in that Israel's actions affect far more people than just those terrorists -- not that this means Israel should stop any action negatively affecting those other than terrorists, but that questions of morality and proper action become much more complex.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Pixiest, I have cited my sources and you have dismissed them withou explanation, aparently thinking that in an argument of your word against that of a Nobel Prize winner, your word would win without you even needing to explain.
fugu, Israel attacks, and kills, those that it knows are not terrorists, so do the Islamic militants. That is all that matters.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, Israel attacks locations known to harbor terrorists and terrorists, and sometimes kills those who are not terrorists. It is a regrettable thing, and an awful thing, but an unavoidable thing for a nation.
By your reasoning all nations (with militaries, that have taken part in any sort of military action) are on that level, since every decent-sized military action has involved the deaths of civilians (and often many civilians), making your moral equivalence (unsurprisingly) useless. Try coming up with useful ideas.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by fugu13: No, Israel attacks locations known to harbor terrorists and terrorists, and sometimes kills those who are not terrorists. It is a regrettable thing, and an awful thing, but an unavoidable thing for a nation.
By your reasoning all nations (with militaries, that have taken part in any sort of military action) are on that level, since every decent-sized military action has involved the deaths of civilians (and often many civilians), making your moral equivalence (unsurprisingly) useless. Try coming up with useful ideas.
Alittle civility on your part could only serve to add to the atmosphere of this thread, TIA. Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Nobel Prize winner in question was Amnesty International, whom I quoted. You did not say anything other than to say that you hated them. That is not even an argument, nor for that matter is "spitting."
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Heh, I actually wasn't thinking of it that way at all. Its a serious suggestion for Pel. He's clearly capable of coming up with useful ideas on the subject, yet throws out ideas he should be able to readily evaluate as useless in practice. He needs to spend at least a second after writing any idea and ask 'wait, is that idea useful?' before posting it.
edit: oh, and the 'unsurprisingly' was in regards to most moral equivalences being useless.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
"since every decent-sized military action has involved the deaths of civilians (and often many civilians)" No longer true. Besides which the IDF is usualy acting more as a gendarmie than an army, and yet they use old-style military tactics in police case. Either they need serious training or they don't care enought to act like a responsible gendarmie. The British have a better track record in Norther Ireland than the Israelis, and the Italians a much better one in Sicily.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pel: I was pointing out that the Nobel Prize long ago lost their moral authority and saying "Hey, NOBEL PRIZE! Can't argue with that!" is bug eyed crazy.
Quoting the "write a letter, kill a tree" people isn't an argument either.
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by starLisa: Guy on right is shooting at guy on left while putting himself in front of baby on right. Goal being to protect baby on right. I can use smaller words if you want.
I can see where they're standing. I don't think that should mitigate the point that they're both shooting at the other person's children.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You shall never be taken seriously unless you state why they "lost their moral authority," particularly as everyone else seems to think they still have it. Enlighten us.
Posts: 1332 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually we have the best record in the Phillipines.
Whey they started doing the terrorist stuff there shortly after the spanish american war, we took a bunch of them out, shot half of them, and made the other half bury them upside down wrapped in pig skins, then go back to their homes and tell everyone what happened.
The terrorism stopped right there.
Would you back this very successful strategy, Pel?
Posts: 7085 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
Topic Closed
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
