SpankyMcFarland
-
Posts
5,126 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by SpankyMcFarland
-
-
The meaning of alternative facts in Trumpworld:
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/12/13/putin-paradigm-how-trump-will-rule/
-
One fact I know. Take a man's land and he will hate you.
-
There's SOMETHING going on between Trump and the Russians. It could simply be they have the same way of doing things:
http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2016/12/13/putin-paradigm-how-trump-will-rule/
or that Trump seeks bigger, badder mobster buddies:
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/09/trump-russian-mobster-tokhtakhounov-miss-universe-moscow
-
On 2017-01-11 at 3:05 PM, Argus said:
The report didn't say he took part, merely that he watched. Anyway, he might be a germophobe but it clearly hasn't stopped him having adulterous affairs with women. By his own admission.
Howard Hughes was allegedly the same, willing to ignore an obvious source of bacteria.
-
29 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:
None of the above I disagree with.
The Palestinian Cause was started by a Nazi and Finland fought for the Nazis in WW2. Sweden even pitched-in and Norway went Quizling...Denmark rolled over and showed its tum-tum. It was all pretty sordid. The last ember of that mess that still exists is the so-called Palestinian Cause.
I don't support it. I don't care if you do.
Good man.
-
48 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:
Not sure where this is going.
Look: you're free to supports the Nazi Palestinian Cause...just don't expect me to. You can use whatever slice of history you deem appropriate to justify said support for al-Husseini's efforts.
This is one place it is going:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yrjö_von_Grönhagen
And as for the 'Nazi Palestinian Cause' which I of course support wholeheartedly, I don't expect you to support them too. Each to his own.
The Finns did not confine themselves to fighting on Finnish soil and they definitely assisted the Nazi war machine. I'm sure I'm about to be accused of thread drift here so I will bid adieu.
-
38 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:
The number of Jews in Finland were minimal. Finland made it clear to Nazi Germany that this was their game and were only interested in claiming land the Russians seized in the Winter War. Thus: Finns only served in Finland.
That would depend on a rather liberal interpretation of the national territory:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_military_administration_in_Eastern_Karelia
Notice the lingo used to justify this:
The Continuation War and a trust in a quick German victory over the Soviet Union once again gave rise to Finnish irredentism.[2] The legality of the Finnish claims on Eastern Karelia was justified by both ethno-cultural and military security factors.[2] During the spring of 1941, when the Finnish political leadership understood the full extent of the German plans concerning the Soviet Union, president Ryti commissioned professor of geography Väinö Auer and historian Eino Jutikkala to demonstrate "scholarly" that Eastern Karelia formed a natural part of the Finnish living space.[3] The resulting book Finnlands Lebensraum ("Finland's Living Space") was published in the autumn of 1941, and was intended to legitimize Finnish claims and actions to the international audience.[3] A similar book by historian Jalmari Jaakkola, Die Ostfrage Finnlands ("Finland's Eastern Question") was published in the summer of the same year.[4]
-
Of course, this is a problem in many wars. Britain branded Napoleon a tyrant and enemy of freedom if you don't mind, a notion that has stuck to this day in the Anglosphere, while happily allying itself with a far worse one in the Tsar.
-
5 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:
In this case it does: Haj Amin al-Husseini. Nazi.
The Finns refused to 'deal with' their Jews.
Did the Finns worry unduly about what was happening to Jews and Russians etc. across the Eastern Front? Their actions had concrete consequences.
-
53 minutes ago, Argus said:
The Finns were attacked by the Soviets, who wound up stealing some of their land. they tried to get help from the Swedes and British but were turned down. Under the circumstances, it's hard to blame them looking to allie themselves with the Soviets' enemies to try and defend themselves.
That's all true but they did end up providing concrete assistance to the Nazis' push into Russia with all the horrors that entailed. Are they the only Axis ally that gets a pass? You could apply the same argument to the Palestinians, the Irish revolutionaries of 1916 who spoke of 'our gallant allies in Europe', and Indians who allied with the Japanese.
-
1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:
It is the man and not the ball at this point...this many decades on: reality is the Palestinian Cause was initially the pipe dream of a rabid Nazi Jew hater named Hajj Amin al-Husseini. There is simply zero reason to support an ember of the Third Reich. No argument you could present...ball or man...can change that for me.
As for South Viet-Nam: they were deemed not worthy of nationhood by those who abandoned them as you detail...unlike the Nazi Palestinian Cause. But the sharks ate well.
No national cause belongs to one man and that was a long time ago. Right now the West Bank is being fractured into little pieces from which it will be impossible to create a state. For simple ethnic nationalists like Bennett that is a good outcome but for others who want Israel to remain part of the Western club it will pose serious problems.
BTW one blind spot I find really striking is the pass Finland gets for actually fighting with the Nazis. I hear criticism of Swedish and Irish neutrality on a regular basis and lots of stuff about the Mufti but the Finns never seem to come up. Must be a conspiracy.
-
It is hard to avoid Facebook these days although I do my best. My university reunion and distant relatives force me to correspond there. I try to give as little info away as possible but the settings can be tricky in that regard. I notice when somebody in my neck of the woods gets into legal trouble these days, the journos go straight to the Facebook account to put as much personal stuff up as they can.
-
2 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:
Meh...it really is a 'who cares?' situation. I see you're upset, but you don't have this sort of passion for...say...South Viet-Nam being erased from the map by invaders. And that happened AFTER the Six Day War.
Why is that?
I'm upset? Did you ever hear the expression, 'Play the ball, not the man'? Take a look at the length and tone of the some of the other contributions to this debate even just here over the years. I have passion for all sorts of things that don't come up in this forum on a regular basis, mainly in Europe, and the Middle East is not exactly high on my priority list. All I am saying is that each side has its arguments on the land which I can't be bothered getting into too deeply. For the Palestinians, Muslim or Christian, the land matters. I am merely pointing out my perception of such rows about land around the world. On the wider ME question, Palestine's neighbours should certainly have taken the refugees in and given them full citizenship instead of treating them like pawns.
South Vietnam is an odd choice to pick. The Americans backed a lousy horse there - a regime seen by many of its own people as a corrupt and too Christian oligarchy. A lot of the Viet Cong were local and fought far better than the South Vietnamese Army in the opinion of most US military memoirs. The two sides saw the war very differently and that doomed the American effort. Of course, communism has been a nightmare for the country. I am highly impressed by the lack of bitterness ordinary Vietnamese people feel towards Americans, something we could all learn from.
-
21 hours ago, Argus said:
It's more like if you steal a racist's car is your grandson a thief.
You know what that reminds me of - Guantanamo, a deal that recognizes the ultimate sovereignty of the Cuban government there, whatever that means, but gives the territory to the Americans apparently for eternity despite the fierce objections of the Cubans. Treaties are binding on the weak.
-
14 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:
Well, unfortunately for the poor Arabs, the Sultan enacted the Land Code of 1858 which gave the Zionist Movement the opening they were looking for when it took-off. And believe me, there was better...cheaper land available all over the place.
The Code allowed the buying and selling of land for the first time in the Ottoman Empire. This as a result of Ottoman Imperialism against Russia....etc, etc, etc. The Crimean War draining the royal coffers. The Jews paid dearly for desert...especially connected plots. Plus they paid the head tax/jizya...but were excluded from having to serve in the Ottoman Army. Few Arabs actually bought land (from the Sultan). Not only due to the nomadic lifestyle of many of the region's Arabs; but, it DID mean serving in the Ottoman Army and paying property taxes. Plus Arab Nationalism, of course...that is a factor. But most Arabs got EXACTLY what they wanted after WW1...save the Mufti and crew....and the Zionists on the Jewish side.
The land is still changing hands. A two state solution is being paved over as we correspond.
The basic point I am making is that land is at the heart of this matter. Anti-Semitism or bigotry of any type are secondary. Even Bill Maher and Sam Harris have chosen to ignore this truism. People fighting over land hate each other and always find good reasons to hate each other in Bihar, Fermanagh or Hebron. The only time I have been threatened with violence in a forum was during a discussion of a property lawsuit where I made some mild comments about the rights of way of hikers through farms.
-
BTW I am aware of the absurdity of a North American resident like myself lecturing anybody else on this topic. At least the Jewish People do have an ancient claim to the land of Israel which is more than can be said for my lot here. The Beothuk of Newfoundland conveniently disappeared in various ways as the Europeans encroached on the island. Were I a surviving member of that tribe, I would feel perfectly entitled to regard the foreigners with some lack of affection.
-
4 hours ago, Argus said:
It's more like if you steal a racist's car is your grandson a thief.
So if you get a generation in, you keep the loot? Does that apply to all stolen goods? Anyway, no matter what one wants to call this process or whether God has privately gifted the real estate to one side or another, it's happening right now in the West Bank - no need to bother the grandparents. The possibility of a two state solution is disappearing in front of our eyes as Bibi protests his innocence. At least Naftali Bennett is honest enough to declare his intentions.
There is a larger issue of Islam's failure to modernise but that is peripheral to the land feud in Palestine. Needless to say, both sides are bigoted. In fact, ALL humans are racist and sectarian. We all prefer our own. Some hide this better than others but that's how it is. Many of my SA Indian relatives prefer the Afrikaner approach to race relations because you know where you stand with those people. The Anglophones were full of pious lies like their kin in Canada.
-
What will he do to help all the opioid users who voted for him? In West Virginia, for example, where he did very well:
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/2016/12/19/How-West-Virginia-Became-Ground-Zero-Opioid-Epidemic
I didn't hear a lot of specifics about that in the speech.
-
So if I steal a racist's car, I am not a thief? The absurdity of this thread is transparent to anyone from a country that has been colonized. It's one of many jaded arguments colonizers use to justify their theft.
-
On 1/5/2017 at 1:41 PM, Argus said:
Finance department now predicting DECADES of deficits under Liberals. What did I say months ago? That this Liberal government would never turn in a balanced budget. It's ideologically incapable of putting any importance into the effort. And a substantial number of its supporters pay no income tax anyway.
"The budget will balance itself." Uh huh.
I think they are predicting decades of deficits, not decades of Liberal government.
-
How much time does O'Leary spend in Canada these days? Is he vulnerable on that front?
-
The thing is how will brash celebs be seen after a few years of Trump? O'Leary might not seem so endearing then.
-
On 1/12/2017 at 9:19 PM, ?Impact said:
Let's see housing, good food, clothing, etc. Yes the comparative prices of televisions has dropped, but that is totally meaningless. Shelter has skyrocketed, especially in urban areas. Good food is no longer affordable, yes I can buy packaged sugar cheaper but that doesn't help anything. Clothing is also relative. Yes I can get a cheaper petroleum product to wear today, but a good piece of clothing that will last has increased significantly.
Apart from jobs, restaurants and concerts (big considerations I'll admit), Toronto's allure mystifies me. It is an ugly place.
-
The way things are going, some sort of universal income will be necessary.
Muslim antisemitism the cause of the Israeli conflict
in The Rest of the World
Posted · Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Can you really buy a nation's land like that, though? Doesn't it sound a bit dodgy? It's not a simple question and reminds me of an attempt by a Newfoundlander to sell the water in a lake to the Americans which might have opened up all lakes to similar sales in the country under NAFTA. Fortunately, Chretien stepped in and stopped the deal.
Is Yasser Arafat the only Palestinian? Why was he born in Cairo? Weren't many Jewish settlers born abroad as well? Stables and horse come to mind.