posted
It seems like this person should call the cops. And if the cops won't do anything, it seems like this person should move.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
And funny how it completely ignores anything that came before. Like how the house owner got the house in the first place, or why Joe is living where he is. Any of that troublesome context.
Posts: 11187 | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged |
If you shoot or even assault the UPS driver, you're going to be up on charges no matter how justified you felt. Second, even in self-defence if you seal off Joe's house and starve him, you'll still be up on charges.
You can't just go off and be a vigilante without serious consequences.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
But if you ask the UPS driver to show you what's in the package and he starts beating you with iron bars, I don't think there's a jury in the world that'd blame you for shooting him.
Particularly when most of what you're armed with is paintball guns.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not so sure, especially since you'd be jumping into his truck with firearms in addition to the paintball guns and pulling it over to the side of the road.
The driver may very well claim self-defence as well.
Either way, you do seem to concede that you should end up in a trial in front of a jury which is indeed the correct approach to resolve the question afterwards.
Posts: 7593 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
As far as "parables" go, that was a really simplistic and inapplicable one. No context. You could make one that uses the same harebrained analogies and rhetorical strategies as that one and support the Gaza side of the story.
Posts: 805 | Registered: Jun 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax: It seems like this person should call the cops. And if the cops won't do anything, it seems like this person should move.
quote:It seems like this person should call the cops. And if the cops won't do anything, it seems like this person should move.
I think it's fits the intended analogy a lot better to assume that there are no police to come.
In such a situation (talking about the analogy only, not about the larger situation), I'm not comfortable with the idea that the person has a duty to move because of the bad behavior of their neighbor. Maybe it's the better and smarter move, but I don't think that their only moral choices are "deal with it" or "move away from it".
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax: It seems like this person should call the cops. And if the cops won't do anything, it seems like this person should move.
This is a really important quote to address.
You guys all realize that property cannot be "owned" right? We recognize a "Right to property." - What up with that? What does it meant OWN things? It means that society, that we all, together, recognize that you have rights in an object, in a piece of land.
This assumes, as a prerequisite to property ownership, that there a society that agrees to something. That's all that law is - it is the language of society - it is what we agree to enforce, and how we agree to interact with one another.
We're in an age in the world where there is not of one mind. The UN is so new, and so not respected - I mean, the veto wielding countries all wield vetoes because they have not agreed to subject themselves to a law - they are basically a body and forum to discuss how to meet minds - and the minds are just not meeting.
Israel and the Palestinians do not agree on law. They don't agree on property law, they don't agree on human rights laws, they don't agree on the laws of war, they don't agree on religion.
Who are the cops? Does anyone bother to look at the situation with the broad context of feelings, emotions, and history at play? Can we agree on the same laws?
And if the cops don't do anything, we should move?!? I mean, seriously?! Yea, tell the Jews who have been persecuted for thousands of years, and who fought for their homeland for years, never got it, until they were almost exterminated, Europe felt bad for them, so they allowed them a piece of the Middle East after taking it from the Ottomans. You honestly expect Jews not to fight tooth and nail for a homeland they lost, after suffering 2000 years of persecution?
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Is it undisputed that there was a Jewish state in Palestine, and that it was the predominant state at the time? I'd like some clarification on this issue, and I don't mean it in a sarcastic way. I'm under-educated about this matter and have had trouble getting close to definitive answers from anyone. I know that scriptures indicate this, but I'm wondering about the validity and interpretation of those documents from a secular POV.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's not clear how to analogize the fact that 45% of Gaza residents are under the age of 15
Wow... I didn't know that. I'd read about specific cases of children needing medical care who weren't allowed to leave or otherwise get medical supplies from outside of Gaza, but I didn't know that such a significant part of the population is children. That's terrifying. For all its talk about the morals of the Palestinian leadership, Israel clearly doesn't give a **** about the lives of non-Israeli civilians.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
For the sake of curiosity, what was the world population of Jews in 1945? I'd bet there are more Jews today living in America than in Israel. Where did all of Israel's Jews come from? I'll admit to not knowing a lot about continental genocide in Europe outside of Nazi controlled areas, but extermination as a whole sounds like hyperbole.
But carry on with your larger point.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Around 17 million, with 9.5 million in Europe, IIRC.
Edit: Ooops, sorry, I read your question wrong. That was pre-war. In 1945 it was 6 million less. 11 million, 3.5 in Europe.
Posts: 9866 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:You guys all realize that property cannot be "owned" right? We recognize a "Right to property." - What up with that? What does it meant OWN things? It means that society, that we all, together, recognize that you have rights in an object, in a piece of land.
Amen, man. Tell it to the libertarians.
Posts: 4600 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:It seems like this person should call the cops. And if the cops won't do anything, it seems like this person should move.
I think it's fits the intended analogy a lot better to assume that there are no police to come.
In the real world, yes. In this terrible, hamfisted analogy used to try to create an unrealistic apprehension of complicated middle easeter affairs, no.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sin, I dunno what you want as proof. Archaeology? Been to Israel? It's all over the place. Arch of titus with a menorah on it? We have menorahs? I dunno what does it for you - research it.
Same thing Lyr, google it and see which sources you think are reliable.
I understand why you might read "almost exterminated" as hyperbole, but realize that Hitler's ambitions were limitless. He posed a very real threat to Jews everywhere. And Israel's population largely comes from holocaust survivors, and secondly, Sefardi Jews who were previously in Arab lands.
We discussed this once before, how the holocaust is so routed in the modern Jewish psyche that there is so much rhetoric that warns young Jews nowadays to be so gracious to the United States for all it does for us, but to be ever vigilant, lest the Holocaust repeat itself. Regardless of Jewish population, I'd say that overwhelming majority clings to the existence of Israel, and ties their identity very strongly to that existence. There is no more getting up and moving.
Lastly, to give you a glimpse of the things traveling in the Jewish, Israeli and pro-Israel communities, check out this spoof video on "We are the World"
For the sake of curiosity, what was the world population of Jews in 1945? I'd bet there are more Jews today living in America than in Israel. Where did all of Israel's Jews come from? I'll admit to not knowing a lot about continental genocide in Europe outside of Nazi controlled areas, but extermination as a whole sounds like hyperbole.
But carry on with your larger point.
A certain proportion of Israels Jews especially from Eastern Europe were not actually Jews when they moved to Israel. Many families lied or embellished the truth in order to take advantage of the law of return, especially while trying to escape economic and political strife in Russia. I have no clear idea of the numbers, but central Europe now has a growing population of Russians who came via Israel in the last 20 years, some of whom are perhaps not as (ethnically) Jewish as they or their parents and grandparents made out. Some of them of course are.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's not clear how to analogize the fact that 45% of Gaza residents are under the age of 15
Wow... I didn't know that. I'd read about specific cases of children needing medical care who weren't allowed to leave or otherwise get medical supplies from outside of Gaza, but I didn't know that such a significant part of the population is children. That's terrifying. For all its talk about the morals of the Palestinian leadership, Israel clearly doesn't give a **** about the lives of non-Israeli civilians.
Bulls**t. Israel is constantly bringing Arabs from Gaza for free medical care in Israeli hospitals.
Israel, over the weekend, saved the life of a three-year-old daughter of a top Gaza-based Hamas leader, though the act of kindness was completely ignored by the terrorist group and regional Arab and Western liberal media.
...
Jordanian media later reported on the incident, but completely cut out the portion where the girl’s life was saved by Israeli doctors or that Israel has not hesitated to allow the unfettered transport through its territory of a family member of one of its most dedicated enemies.
On Israeli TV she admitted that she had planned to explode the bomb in the hospital where she was being treated. She stated that she had been recruited by the Fatah Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigade, and added that she had wanted to target as many children as possible.
No Palestinian Authority Arab has been denied medical care in Israel, according to government officials, who point out that the real issue has to do with the issue of permits from the PA government.
“If the Hamas regime does not grant permits for medical care, the Israeli government can do nothing to help the patient,” the Foreign Ministry pointed out in a report this week. “Israel will facilitate all cases of medical treatments from Gaza, unless the patient is a known perpetrator of terrorism.”
It is important to note that PA terrorists have exploited medical care arrangements to carry out terrorist attacks more than 20 times since 2005.
Last year, 10,544 patients and their companions left Gaza to access medical care in Israel, and there were 382 emergency evacuations from Gaza for medical purposes.
During the same 12-month period, some 4,883 tons of medical equipment and medicine were delivered to the region, as well as medical supplies for the disabled such as wheelchairs, crutches and first aid kits. Also shipped to the region's hospitals and clinics last year were heart monitors, baby feeding tubes, dental equipment, medical books, ambulance emergency equipment, artificial limbs and infant sleeping bags.
In the first quarter of 2010, 152 trucks of medical supplies and equipment made their way into Gaza. In an average week this month, some 37 truckloads of hygiene products were shipped to the region through the crossings. A new CT scan machine was recently delivered to Gaza as well.
Israel maintains a regular corridor for the transfer of medical patients out of Gaza, and about 200 medical staff members pass through the Erez Crossing terminal every month. “Israel also helps coordinate the transfer of Jordanian doctors into Gaza,” noted the Foreign Ministry spokesman.
Moreover, the Hadassah medical organization in Jerusalem donates $3 million in aid each year to treat Palestinian Authority Arabs in Israel. Following the outbreak of the H1N1 swine flu, three Israeli hospitals were assigned to treat cases in Gaza, the Foreign Ministry said, and 44,500 immunization doses were delivered to the region.
quote:Link In the midst of last week’s brutal fighting in Gaza and Israel’s south, Israeli doctors from Save a Child’s Heart, operated on a tiny baby boy from Gaza, giving him life-saving heart surgery.
In the middle of a war. And morons like you claim Israel is denying medical care. Is Israel being extra careful, due to the atrocious attempts by the Arabs to use Israel's compassion as yet another weapon with which to kill Jews? Does the fact that Arabs use marked ambulances to transport weapons (in contravention of the much vaunted Geneva conventions that everyone likes to bash over Israel's head) have anything to do with it?
quote:Link Eight-year-old Palestinian cancer patient treated near Tel Aviv grateful to Israeli doctors.
The Palestinian child, who is being treated by Israeli doctors and nurses, understands the complexity of the situation. “The doctors are Israeli and they take good care of us,” she says. “Not all Israelis are bad. There are some good ones and some bad ones.”
In short, you are either incredibly, colossally ignorant, or you are an evil piece of garbage. Take your propaganda and shove it.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
I don't really get the "we were here first arguments". If that was the case, the same people in this country supporting the Jewish people's right to Isreal, would be supporting the Native American people's right to all our land.
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know, Strider. The "You" was broad. I've come to appreciate Lisa's back-against-the-wall logic and tone.
Notice, I didn't use a "we were here first" argument. However, it's not exactly clear what the moral authority for Native American loss of the land is. Nor do I see how it can be used in argument against Israel.
Realize that the UN created Israel. Where is Western accountability for that?
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Realize that the UN created Israel. Where is Western accountability for that?
Seriously? The partitioning of Israel was done by Great Britain- I'd say that affords them (and the US for backing it all) a certain (rather enormous) amount of accountability. Who is denying that? Now, having created it, the issue of what it does and how it is done is an issue of great concern to the west as well. So what point are you arguing? That the west doesn't take responsibility for its actions? Because I think staying as closely involved as possible is taking some amount of responsibility. Not enough, perhaps, but some.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:In short, you are either incredibly, colossally ignorant, or you are an evil piece of garbage. Take your propaganda and shove it.
yes, flip out some more!
at least she is standing up to you
What .... are you talking about?
Well, at least you seem to admit she's flipping out even if it is made a bit more okay if it were confrontation with me. That's a start, right?
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Which carries even less weight with me than the "we were here first" argument. I have a lot of respect for the "we were here first" argument, and the fact that there is a pretty clear line of claim going back thousands of years for a particular, small area of land from a specific people who've managed to keep part of a culture alive for centuries. That's impressive. I don't think it's enough to evict the current inhabitants, but I don't ignore it out of hand either. The religious argument on the other hand, I can't really give any credit to, but I'm not of an Abrahamic religion, so, my sympathy there is limited.
quote:From Armoth: Same thing Lyr, google it and see which sources you think are reliable.
I understand why you might read "almost exterminated" as hyperbole, but realize that Hitler's ambitions were limitless. He posed a very real threat to Jews everywhere. And Israel's population largely comes from holocaust survivors, and secondly, Sefardi Jews who were previously in Arab lands.
We discussed this once before, how the holocaust is so routed in the modern Jewish psyche that there is so much rhetoric that warns young Jews nowadays to be so gracious to the United States for all it does for us, but to be ever vigilant, lest the Holocaust repeat itself. Regardless of Jewish population, I'd say that overwhelming majority clings to the existence of Israel, and ties their identity very strongly to that existence. There is no more getting up and moving.
Same thing? Millions of Jews were left at the end of World War II, that's hardly the same thing. Almost exterminated is closer to what happened to American Indian populations, where something like 95% were wiped out by diseases, and that's not even including the ones we actively killed in wars and roundups.
Six out of seventeen million is what, a 35% loss? That's devastating, horrible, and tragic, but hardly close to extermination. Even if it was a 50% loss, it wouldn't be close to extermination. You can talk about what Hitler intended all you want, but he never did it. Intentions matter right up until the point where you try to draw support from a hypothetical world that Hitler intended to exist, but that never came to be. Hitler was stopped. The Jews were not exterminated, or close to exterminated. They suffered a horrible blow that won't be forgotten, but their numbers, as a world population, were more than healthy enough for survival, and in only a couple decades after WWII ended, they had their own flourishing state.
If I were you I'd be vigilant too. You chose an extremely hostile part of the world to make your home. On the flip side, I don't think you should be gracious, per se, to America. I don't think you would have been able to create the home you have and sustain it without America, but, you still did all the heavy lifting yourselves, so I have a hard time justifying America grabbing credit for writing checks and sending over military advisers. I think I could make an argument one way or the other for whether we benefit or not from our unflagging support of Israel, but I'm fine with being their allies, to a point. I do think, however, you should recognize what America has meant for Israel. Some people can't separate recognition from reverence, which is a problem.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Realize that the UN created Israel. Where is Western accountability for that?
Seriously? The partitioning of Israel was done by Great Britain-
You only embarrass yourself by saying things like this. Yes, Great Britain did the first unilateral partition when it gave 79% of the Palestinian Mandate to Emir Abdullah in 1922 as the Emirate of Transjordan (which is now the Kingdom of Jordan). The US had absolutely nothing to do with that.
But the partition plan of 1947, which split the remaining 21% up between the Jews and those Arabs who chose to stay on our side after the first partition, was voted into existence by the United Nations.
Seriously. You need to check your facts before you just make stuff up.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I do think, however, you should recognize what America has meant for Israel. Some people can't separate recognition from reverence, which is a problem.
We can recognize a lot of things. I recognize, for example, that the US embargoed the fledgeling State of Israel from the moment it declared its independence in 1948, and that if Josef Stalin hadn't sold us arms, the Arabs would have slaughtered us to the last person.
I recognize that Nixon embargoed Israel as well when we were being faced with public threats of genocide by the Arabs. This was back before they realized the wisdom of being deceptive in their intent.
America has hardly been Israel's friend all these years. It was Jimmy Carter, anti-semitic nukyuler engineer and all around slime, who forced Israel to give up 2/3 of its territory in exchange for an extremely cold "peace" with Egypt. It was Bill Clinton who connived to bring Arafat and the PLO back from well-deserved exile in Libya, essentially creating the current mess.
Has the US done some things which have been helpful for Israel? Sure. But it's done at least that and more for the Arabs.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's interesting. In every case where land has been partitioned between Muslims and others, the same thing has happened. The Muslim side of the partition has killed or expelled or enslaved its non-Muslim population. The Muslims on the non-Muslim side have bided their time and attempted to take that side over as well.
Lebanon was the result of partitioning Syria so that the Christian Arabs would be safe from the Muslim ones. Where are the Christians in Syria today? And how about those Muslims in Lebanon?
The same thing happened when the Palestinian Mandate was split by Great Britain in 1922. Had the Arabs gone to the huge piece in the east, none of this would be happening. But unsurprisingly, Jordan is Judenrein, and the Arabs on ourside are trying to kill us.
Even if we were to, God forbid, give the Arabs Judea and Samaria, they're already a majority in the Galilee, and they've made it clear that they intend to go for that next. Hell, they've made it clear that they intend to take it all and get rid of Israel entirely.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I do think, however, you should recognize what America has meant for Israel. Some people can't separate recognition from reverence, which is a problem.
We can recognize a lot of things. I recognize, for example, that the US embargoed the fledgeling State of Israel from the moment it declared its independence in 1948, and that if Josef Stalin hadn't sold us arms, the Arabs would have slaughtered us to the last person.
I recognize that Nixon embargoed Israel as well when we were being faced with public threats of genocide by the Arabs. This was back before they realized the wisdom of being deceptive in their intent.
America has hardly been Israel's friend all these years. It was Jimmy Carter, anti-semitic nukyuler engineer and all around slime, who forced Israel to give up 2/3 of its territory in exchange for an extremely cold "peace" with Egypt. It was Bill Clinton who connived to bring Arafat and the PLO back from well-deserved exile in Libya, essentially creating the current mess.
Has the US done some things which have been helpful for Israel? Sure. But it's done at least that and more for the Arabs.
Which is why I don't think you should necessarily kowtow before us. We're not angels. We act out of self-interest, and when we can, out of compassion and morality. When we can't, well, that's the way the world works, and much as it might turn my stomach, it is what it is. Israel wouldn't exist if not for the United States. But at the same time, we're not acting solely for your sake, so yeah, I'm sure we've done a lot of stuff that you didn't like. I'm not claiming any different.
But then, one of the things that you and I oddly agree on, is that both Israel and the US might be better off if both sides simply cut ties and went our separate ways. I still think, even with the political ramifications, it would be a terrible blow to Israel, but I suppose that's debatable. Perhaps a middle of the road solution would be to put financial separate between us, and make an alliance of interests similar to what we have with most European nations. Share intel, trade, cultural exchanges, do some joint military exercises from time to time, but that's all. Then we wouldn't be tarred with your mistakes, and you wouldn't be hamstrung by American demands that serve interests that run counter to your own.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: Israel wouldn't exist if not for the United States.
I honestly don't get why you keep saying this. It isn't true. If it hadn't been for the USSR in 1948 and 1949, Israel might not exist. But I don't recall a single time in history when the USA has stood against the world to help Israel against her enemies.
There are words, yes. Very supportive words at times. Aid? My goodness, yes. But it's far outweighed by the aid given to those who want to destroy us.
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: But then, one of the things that you and I oddly agree on, is that both Israel and the US might be better off if both sides simply cut ties and went our separate ways.
From your mouth to Washington's ears. So long as they do the same with the savage hordes that surround Israel as well.
quote:Originally posted by Lyrhawn: I still think, even with the political ramifications, it would be a terrible blow to Israel, but I suppose that's debatable. Perhaps a middle of the road solution would be to put financial separate between us, and make an alliance of interests similar to what we have with most European nations. Share intel, trade, cultural exchanges, do some joint military exercises from time to time, but that's all. Then we wouldn't be tarred with your mistakes, and you wouldn't be hamstrung by American demands that serve interests that run counter to your own.
posted
By the way - I was expressing gratitude, not as much for what the US does for Israel, but for what the US has done for me and my people - and other peoples.
I love this country.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Bulls**t. Israel is constantly bringing Arabs from Gaza for free medical care in Israeli hospitals.
Fine. Those cases exist. But more than 1.5 million people live in the Gaza Strip under siege conditions, with all the hardship and privations that that entails. And no, before you say so, Israel is not delivering remotely close to the amount of humanitarian aid required to alleviate the harm caused by the siege.
posted
Also, when Israel bombed Gaza last year, it destroyed a lot of hospitals and schools as well as residences, and it hasn't done much of anything to fix this damage. The Gazans need building supplies more than anything to heal from the bombings.
Posts: 241 | Registered: Nov 2009
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lisa, I'd learn more, and enjoy your posts more, if you didn't assume that everyone who disagrees with you is either a moron or evil. I'd also be a lot more open to discussions of these points with you as well, and your message would probably be better received overall.
Thank you for providing some examples of specific numbers regarding medical aid given, and the difficulties in giving that aid when the opposing faction doesn't cooperate. I don't think the situation is as simple as you make it out to be, but I appreciate you posting those figures and links.
I wasn't commenting on specific aid because I am not 100% on the details. I know that Israel does give aid, but that the need for aid is much greater than the supply. I also wasn't aware of how many people had been seen recently.
quote:Bulls**t. Israel is constantly bringing Arabs from Gaza for free medical care in Israeli hospitals.
Fine. Those cases exist. But more than 1.5 million people live in the Gaza Strip under siege conditions, with all the hardship and privations that that entails. And no, before you say so, Israel is not delivering remotely close to the amount of humanitarian aid required to alleviate the harm caused by the siege.
Yeah, ignoring the subtleties (that do exist) about the Gaza situation, you can't wash your hands with token aid to fix some of the problems that, for the most part, you created in the first place.
Well, you can for pr/whitewash purposes (America did it constantly in Iraq) but it creates nothing but a propaganda narrative.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know if this has been posted, but it gives another viewpoint to consider: that the siege, while harming the common people of Gaza, is actually strengthening Hamas:
posted
I was about to dismiss that out of hand but .. the Economist has more or less made a solid case on that one.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Interesting article. I'd have thought that Hamas' gain in the siege was a no-brainer, but I didn't know a lot of the specifics, or some of the thought processes for the players involved.
I'd love to see an article detailing the split between Hamas and the PA. More and more it looks like the two groups are becoming distinct, entrenched entities, rather than simply rival factions of a larger Palestinian polity. I wonder what that means for the peace process. If it means we have to settle Palestinian reconciliation before we can deal with Palestinian-Israeli reconciliation, then we're even further away, and both Hamas and Israel are making it worse on a daily basis. What if, however, it means we can leave Gaza out entirely, and deal only with a West Bank-Israel solution that puts off Gaza until a future date? It doesn't solve the problem, but it gets rid of a major barrier.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: In the real world, yes. In this terrible, hamfisted analogy used to try to create an unrealistic apprehension of complicated middle easeter affairs, no.
Thanks. I'm now imagining Lisa pounding away angrily on the keyboard with two giant country hams on the ends of her arms, and it makes me feel that while misplaced, some small portion of her anger might be justified.
Posts: 3950 | Registered: Mar 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
