Israeli Navy Raids Gaza Aid Flotilla, 10 Confirmed Dead

[M.Dancer]

oh that dub.

Tired of being naomiglover, dub?

[dre]

Yes, because good fuckin grief, that's what I was saying.*

*I suppose I'd better edit this post to make it clear that that's sarcasm.

I was paraphrasing.

The whole argument that because land changed hand in these other examples means that people cant be critical of Israels actions without also tackling these other situations, or that these other situations somehow justify land changing hands through force in this case is utterly and competely moronic and intellectually dishonest. I dont think you actually made that argument but you referenced it so I replied.

[bud]

Tired of being naomiglover, dub?

if it isn't israel's number #1 friend.

or does that go to bonam? where is dogonporch? is he digging important notes about the grand mufti and his nazi ties?

do you still foam at the mouth whenever someone makes any comments against israel?

[Bonam]

...

Why yet another alias?

[Guest American Woman]

I was paraphrasing.

The whole argument that because land changed hand in these other examples means that people cant be critical of Israels actions without also tackling these other situations, or that these other situations somehow justify land changing hands through force in this case is utterly and competely moronic and intellectually dishonest. I dont think you actually made that argument but you referenced it so I replied.

No, I didn't make the argument, and I didn't reference it to say that it meant people couldn't be critical of Israel without also tackling these other situations or that these situations somehow justified land changing hands through force.

I referenced it to point out that certain supporters of Palestine dismiss these other examples as "different."

I'll repeat exactly what I said: "Other examples of people losing their land through war/conflict/what-have-you, have been given in this thread, but of course it's never the same; it's always 'different.'"

I then concluded: "Evidently Israel is supposed to live by standards no other nation in the world is expected to live."

It appears as if they are holding Israel to different standards than they do anyone else, if when other nations did it, other examples given, are "different/not the same."

[myata]

I know she doesn't give a crap about morals. When presented with the fact that Hamas is destroying Palestinians homes, something Israel has really taken heat over, she said it was morally wrong, but she didn't know enough about it to know if it was legally wrong. And that's all she had to say about it. No condemnation for Hamas.

Any illegal act by any party is morally wrong and should be opposed and condemned. Agreed?

She does hate Israel. And she's started a bajillion threads to prove it.

Does it diminish validity of facts presented in these threads? Did you try to address the facts rather than intentions of the poster?

I will say this, though. All of her threads and baseless posts, ending in nothing but insults when one dares to disagree and/or hold her accountable to her statements, have made me seriously reconsider my views on this conflict. It's made me really stop and rethink all that's happened. For one thing, it's made me realize that a lot of people out there are just blaming Israel and excusing everything Palestine does. Israel does something, and it's automatically condemned by most of the media/world. Palestinians, however, are apparently driven to engage in everything they've done. And as such, it's not "Palestine," or "Palestinians" who receive any criticism at all, but Hamas. Those who see only Palestine's side say, "but I've criticized Hamas!"

This sort of generic references without specific examples are of course impossible to address in an intelligent discussion.

I don't see criticizing Hamas now and then with a blanket declaration of "Hamas is wrong," while not criticizing Palestine or Palestinians, when Hamas is part of their government, as any kind of criticism equal to blaming/criticizing Israel.

I posted an reference in another thread to statements made by Israeli rightwing groups that are in the government of that country, should it give somebody right for blank indiscriminate criticism of Israel then? In other words, are you ready to apply the same stringent standards of objectivity to yourself here?

On the one hand, we've got severe criticism for Israel, on the other hand no criticism for Palestine, only an occasional "Hamas is wrong" statement, usually followed by some form of "Palestinians only voted for them because of Israel's actions." So again, Israel is to blame; Israel is even to blame when Palestinians vote for a terrorist organization.

Are you replying to your own ideas about other peoples ideas or to some specific post or statement?

But is the hatred towards Jews through history ever seen as a reason for why Israel has acted as it has? Not at all; it's not even taken into consideration as far as I can see.

It may be in part a reason, but hardly a justification. Do you justify and abject of responsibility for illegal, atrocious acts anybody with a history of tough life? Again, looks like you want different standards for yourself and yours as opposed to, generally.

As for the idea that Israel shouldn't target apartment buildings/hospitals/what have you when the leaders of such groups as Hamas 'hide out' in them, ie: hide behind civilians, that Israel should simply arrest them, I have to wonder how one would accomplish that. I can just see the U.S. soldiers marching into Iraq, going up to Saddam's home, and arresting him. Simple as that. Saddam, I'm sure, would have just answered the door; same as all these Hamas/terrorist leaders, if Israel would just make the attempt. But of course, one first has to assume that Israel hasn't made the attempt.

So you're never questioning whether Israeli soldiers should be in Palestine, as US soldiers - in Iraq? In other words you make nothing about agression your party is involved in, but start seeing things immediately when they are attacked? Is it because you assume that your party can go anywhere and do anything, even by force and even by lethal force, but any resistence to your act (how should it be classified) is immediate crime and relieves your side of any further responsibility to conduct in civilized manner? Would it be plain, clear and simple restatement of ages old doctrine: (my) force is right?

At any rate, I first supported Israel in this conflict; then after focusing on the other side, I became more critical of Israel than I was Palestine. Now, knowing how many anti-Israel one-sided Palestine supporters there are out there, I realize that there is a lot of propaganda against Israel being thrown about. And too many of those supporting Palestine at all costs have no regard for the truth; if it will make Israel look bad, they are going to push it, truth be damned.

More pointless generic stuff. Are you saying that all reporting of the conflict is false? Who exactly are those you refer to? Do they have names or faces? No? When what is it you're trying to say? Try to figure it out.

For example, I used to believe that the bulldozer did purposely run over Rachel Corrie. Now I see how ludicrous that idea is, and it makes me realize that there are people who don't care about the truth. I also used to believe that "desperation" is what drove people to become suicide bombers. I know realize no other reason than 'hatred' is necessary; or a desire for 'glory.' There are a lot of desperate people in the world who aren't resorting to targeting and killing innocent civilians; desperate people whose purpose/goal isn't to kill civilians, including babies and children.

Good self psychoanalysis. But again, are you saying that all reporting from the zone of conflict is patently false? Should we just take your word on it because you so felt it through?

Just because Israel is the richer, more powerful nation, doesn't mean it's in the wrong. It doesn't mean they should roll over and not fight for their right to exist. Just because Palestine is a poorer, weaker nation, doesn't mean it's right. Power isn't synonymous with wrong, and that seems to be part of the thinking regarding this conflict.

Well looks like you're disputing with yourself. And you seem to be winning. Great stuff!

Other examples of people losing their land through war/conflict/what-have-you, have been given in this thread, but of course it's never the same; it's always "different." Evidently Israel is supposed to live by standards no other nation in the world is expected to live.

Is any "what-have-you" good for a "richer, more powerful" nation to acquire some extra real estate?

Israel has a right to exist and has, I believe, managed to exist only because it's refused to do otherwise. In other words, Israel has to look out for Israel, or risk losing the only Jewish state. That's not to say Israel is perfect and always does the right thing. No nation does. Lord knows our nations weren't founded, nor have they thrived, on only goodness and light.

Ummm I'm not sure how far this should be read into. Is anything that is done in the name of looking out for Israel immediate nice and good and justified? Does the same rule apply to the other side, e.g. Palestine that is being deprived of their land on a daily basis? Or again as seems to be convention here all such rights only apply to "me"?

At any rate, as long as we have a poster spamming the forum with anti-Israel threads (just how many do we need, all saying the same thing?), I will speak out for Israel. So thank you, namomiglover, for helping me to strengthen my views within myself regarding this conflict. I feel more certain than I have in the past that my views are well founded.

So you set your opinion based on what somebody else is doing, rather than your own independent thought and facts? Guess you can indeed thank that poster for making that clear - to yourself and everybody else here.

[Guest American Woman]

So you set your opinion based on what somebody else is doing, rather than your own independent thought and facts?

What part of "It's made me really stop and rethink all that's happened" leads you to believe my opinion isn't "based on my own independent thoughts and facts?"

As for the rest of your post, I don't waste my time responding to dishonest posters who crop my quotes to make my statements into something they're not.

[ToadBrother]

Any illegal act by any party is morally wrong and should be opposed and condemned. Agreed?

So the difference here is that the Allied victors, when stripping the Axis powers of territory, or previously, the Treaty of Versailles, or previous to that the Congress of Vienna, were territorial modifications agreed upon by... victors... um...

I'm confused here. Israel beat down every solitary attempt to knock it back into the ocean, in the process inevitably taking ground (read: territory) which it then occupied. After all of this, Israel in fact gave big chunks of it back (ie. Sinai), but has essentially occupied areas, much as the Soviets booted the Japanese out of the Kurils and put Soviet colonists in, or most of the Germans were booted out of Bohemia and Danzig after the World Wars...

I'm really confused. What is the difference between Israel's defacto seizure of the Occupied Territories and, say, Bohemia? In the case of Bohemia, the Austro-Hungarian Empire gambled and lost, as was the case for Danzig (Germany is probably damn lucky they didn't lose other pieces of contested territory like Schleswig-Holstein), well, that was a gamble and lose, too. And the same goes for the Kurils as Japan's punishment.

The lesson ought to be "Make war on your neighbors and they beat you, you lose territory", not "Make war on neighobors and they beat you, and you get to bitch and snivel and laud suicide bombers and rocket attacks on the victor over theoretical borders you in fact rejected until the end of time" with the added bonus that "bleeding heart radicals in the West will look the other way at your own atrocities, incompetence and corruption as they continue to rail against the guy that repeatedly kicked your ass."

Edited June 10, 2010 by ToadBrother

[myata]

What part of "It's made me really stop and rethink all that's happened" leads you to believe my opinion isn't "based on my own independent thoughts and facts?"

This part:

"At any rate, as long as we have a poster spamming the forum with anti-Israel threads (just how many do we need, all saying the same thing?), I will speak out for Israel." (A.W.)

Makes it so clear that your "speaking out" has very little to do with thinking (or rethinking, etc).

Yes somebody should be to blame for what I have said. All too familiar, here don't even mention it.

[Guest American Woman]

This part:

"At any rate, as long as we have a poster spamming the forum with anti-Israel threads (just how many do we need, all saying the same thing?), I will speak out for Israel." (A.W.)

So "speaking out for Israel" implies my opinions aren't based on "independent thoughts and facts" how??

Makes it so clear that your "speaking out" has very little to do with thinking (or rethinking, etc).

What it makes "clear," is that I will be vocal about my support for Israel as long as there is a poster spamming the forum with anti-Israel threads. Good grief. How you conclude that means my opinions aren't based on "thinking/rethinking" is beyond me, and about as moronic as it gets.

Yes somebody should be to blame for what I have said. All too familiar, here don't even mention it.

I have no idea what you're on about here, but judging from your earlier conclusions/posts, all I have to say is 'carry on.....'

again.

[naomiglover]

I know she doesn't give a crap about morals. When presented with the fact that Hamas is destroying Palestinians homes, something Israel has really taken heat over, she said it was morally wrong, but she didn't know enough about it to know if it was legally wrong. And that's all she had to say about it. No condemnation for Hamas.

I was not presented with facts. All I saw was an article about Hamas uprooting houses because, as it was written, they were without permits.

Contrary to what you say, I did condemn Hamas as I have before numerous times. I said that it is morally wrong to do it (which to me, is a condemnation, no?), but I do not know the legality behind the situation. Unlike the situation in East Jerusalem where it is illegal, as according to international law (this is a fact which is accepted by the whole world, including the U.S. and Canada), for Israel to demolish homes of Palestinians.

She does hate Israel. And she's started a bajillion threads to prove it.

Contrary to what you say, I don't hate Israel. I do, however, 'hate' Israel's policy towards the Palestinians. I believe that the Palestinians are being treated unjustly and so I speak up about it.

What makes the Palestinians' situation stand out more to me than other unfortunate situations around the world is the fact that many Western governments support Israel, despite their constant violations of international law. I also 'hate' how the name of Jews are being tainted by Zionism, which started out as something I would have supported, but then it has morphed into a racist and immoral ideology.

I will say this, though. All of her threads and baseless posts,

You couldn't be more wrong. If you want to call reference to international law and reports by expert organizations as baseless, then you are proving, yet again, that you're not here to defend the truth and justice.

ending in nothing but insults when one dares to disagree and/or hold her accountable to her statements,

Isn't this what you have done here?

have made me seriously reconsider my views on this conflict. It's made me really stop and rethink all that's happened. For one thing, it's made me realize that a lot of people out there are just blaming Israel and excusing everything Palestine does. Israel does something, and it's automatically condemned by most of the media/world. Palestinians, however, are apparently driven to engage in everything they've done. And as such, it's not "Palestine," or "Palestinians" who receive any criticism at all, but Hamas. Those who see only Palestine's side say, "but I've criticized Hamas!"

Show me one thread or post that supports or justifies Hamas' illegal actions in this forum. I will show you hundreds of threads and post that support Israel's well-documented illegal activities. Many happen to come from you.

This conflict happens to be one-sided and disproportionate if you count the violations committed, the number of people killed, number of lives ruined and the weapons used. However, you want every criticism of Israel to be followed by a criticism of their newest enemy (Hamas). I'm not going to sit here and pretend this is a 50/50 situation.

As for the idea that Israel shouldn't target apartment buildings/hospitals/what have you when the leaders of such groups as Hamas 'hide out' in them, ie: hide behind civilians, that Israel should simply arrest them, I have to wonder how one would accomplish that. I can just see the U.S. soldiers marching into Iraq, going up to Saddam's home, and arresting him. Simple as that. Saddam, I'm sure, would have just answered the door; same as all these Hamas/terrorist leaders, if Israel would just make the attempt. But of course, one first has to assume that Israel hasn't made the attempt.

Have you looked at the Goldstone Report? Both Hamas' and the IDF's alleged use of human shields have been methodically investigated. There are several pages on this that you should read if you really care to understand the situation.

What you are doing is taking unfounded blanket statements and applying it as your proof. What do you have against research and investigations into allegations?

At any rate, I first supported Israel in this conflict; then after focusing on the other side, I became more critical of Israel than I was Palestine. Now, knowing how many anti-Israel one-sided Palestine supporters there are out there, I realize that there is a lot of propaganda against Israel being thrown about. And too many of those supporting Palestine at all costs have no regard for the truth; if it will make Israel look bad, they are going to push it, truth be damned.

That is rich.

What do you call threads and posts from Bonam, jbg, Dancer, DogOnPorch, August, Argus, etc. etc.?

SOOOO one-sided. Right.

Those are all what? Why play this miserable victim card. Everyone knows that Israel is no longer the victim and that they are the ones who are preventing any progress towards a just peace.

Just because Israel is the richer, more powerful nation, doesn't mean it's in the wrong. It doesn't mean they should roll over and not fight for their right to exist.

Illegal settlements on Palestinian land and creating a humanitarian crisis on the Gaza people by blocking pasta from going in is not defending yourself from existence. You're just repeating a same old cliche statement from those who unconditionally support Israel and who have lost the battle against facts.

Just because Palestine is a poorer, weaker nation, doesn't mean it's right. Power isn't synonymous with wrong, and that seems to be part of the thinking regarding this conflict.

I don't think anyone suggested this. What is wrong is breaking international law. You keep forgetting that.

Other examples of people losing their land through war/conflict/what-have-you, have been given in this thread, but of course it's never the same; it's always "different." Evidently Israel is supposed to live by standards no other nation in the world is expected to live.

Why shouldn't everyone live by the standards of international law? Why do you have a difficult time condemning 'everyone' who breaks international law?

At any rate, as long as we have a poster spamming the forum with anti-Israel threads (just how many do we need, all saying the same thing?), I will speak out for Israel.

Israel just happens to violate international law many times over and they have been doing it for so long, while we still have apologists trying to justify their violations. Why should we sit silent while the Israeli propaganda machine tries to paint a make belief world? If I feel that people need to discuss the issue and hear about the issues, I make a post about it. It's your choice if you want to pretend they're not happening.

So thank you, namomiglover, for helping me to strengthen my views within myself regarding this conflict. I feel more certain than I have in the past that my views are well founded.

Heh heh. You are thanking me for allegedly making you more biased towards Israel and more anti-international law? Do you read the crap that you type?

Why don't you actually do what you pretend to do, which is to be objective on this situation. Why don't you ever apply qualified investigations and reports and international law to this conflict?

Edited June 11, 2010 by naomiglover

[dre]

Why don't you actually do what you pretend to do, which is to be objective on this situation. Why don't you ever apply qualified investigations and reports and international law to this conflict?

This is the name of the game for westerners that debate this conflict. I wrote this handly little guide for everyone here...

Sports Fans Guide to the Middle East Conflict.

1. Prejudge the whole thing and take a side. Normally knowing very little of the facts or history of the conflict.

2. Dismiss all evidence that contradict your conclusion, and discredit the sources of it.

3. Change the subject from the debate at hand to a discussion about the opposing posters themselves.

4. Cite irelevant examples of other cases, then pretend you proved a point.

5. Play the race card! Instead of addressing the points an opposing poster has made, dismiss him as being racist. For example (You only think that because you hate jews!!!) or (You only think that because you hate Arabs and Muslims).

6. Make up condescending labels to belittle your opponents (jew hater, Israel apologists etc).

7. Play the terrorist card! (You think THAT because youre a terrorist supporter!)

8. Post a lot! Thousand of times if possible! Cover the same ground over and over and make the same arguments over and over.

9. Godwins Law. Make as many references to Hitler and Nazis as possible.

Edited June 10, 2010 by dre

[bush_cheney2004]

Why shouldn't everyone live by the standards of international law? Why do you have a difficult time condemning 'everyone' who breaks international law?

Israel just happens to violate a lot of international law.

.... You are thanking me for allegedly making you more biased towards Israel and more anti-international law?

.....Why don't you ever apply qualified investigations and reports and international law to this conflict?

You seem to be obsesseed with the notion of "international law" while not understanding what such a framework means, starting with the basic concepts of sovereign nations and their relationships, all the way to the legal (not moral) definition of laws and agreements. How do you reconcile your expectations with respect to "international law" vis-a-vis Palestine and the reality of jurisdiction and enforcement (i.e. lack thereof)?

Have not the Palestinians own actions made a mockery of your reliance on "international law".

[Oleg Bach]

Have you even read the history of the area....The arabs have been trying to push israel into the sea since 48 including those nice palestinians, we all love to talk about....Thats the disease...the symptoms are Israel is running out of options....

The Israelis did the original pushing into the sea back in 48 - it is Palistine that is pushed up against the coast and not Israel.

[Bonam]

The Israelis did the original pushing into the sea back in 48 - it is Palistine that is pushed up against the coast and not Israel.

Take a look at a map sometime, and note the location of the West Bank.

[GostHacked]

Take a look at a map sometime, and note the location of the West Bank.

Also note the location of Gaza.

[Oleg Bach]

Take a look at a map sometime, and note the location of the West Bank.

Not the point - I would like to return to my "homeland" My grandfather had over 2000 acres in north eastern Russia - I should go there - wage a little war and get the old family estate back - I understand that the old house was turned into city hall.

[Bonam]

Also note the location of Gaza.

Yup, it's on the coast. So a proposed Palestinian state consisting of the West Bank and Gaza would have both coastal access as well as inland areas, both good things to have if the state is ever to become viable.

Not the point - I would like to return to my "homeland" My grandfather had over 2000 acres in north eastern Russia - I should go there - wage a little war and get the old family estate back - I understand that the old house was turned into city hall.

Go ahead. Let me know how it goes.

[myata]

So "speaking out for Israel" implies my opinions aren't based on "independent thoughts and facts"

How could it be based on facts if you already decided to "speak for" regardless? I thought that presumes that no further input (thoughts; facts; rational argumentation based on objective reality, etc) would be needed?

What it makes "clear," is that I will be vocal about my support for Israel as long as there is a poster spamming the forum with anti-Israel threads. Good grief. How you conclude that means my opinions aren't based on "thinking/rethinking" is beyond me, and about as moronic as it gets.

Yes, you made it even clearer that your support for your chosen side has nothing to with the facts or objective analysis of situation. See the cheering guide gracefully provided by another poster here.

[GostHacked]

Yup, it's on the coast. So a proposed Palestinian state consisting of the West Bank and Gaza would have both coastal access as well as inland areas, both good things to have if the state is ever to become viable.

Two areas which are no longer connected. It's going to turn into a 3 state solution unless an established corridor can be set up between the two territories so the Palestinians can travel between the two territories safely.

That won't happen in my life time I am sure of it.

[GostHacked]

You seem to be obsesseed with the notion of "international law" while not understanding what such a framework means, starting with the basic concepts of sovereign nations and their relationships, all the way to the legal (not moral) definition of laws and agreements. How do you reconcile your expectations with respect to "international law" vis-a-vis Palestine and the reality of jurisdiction and enforcement (i.e. lack thereof)?

The US seems to be obsessed with International law when it comes to regime change in other countries.

Have not the Palestinians own actions made a mockery of your reliance on "international law".

The US has done a fine job of that already, we must learn from the pros. Because they use it when it suits them.

[bush_cheney2004]

The US seems to be obsessed with International law when it comes to regime change in other countries.

The US and Iraq are actual "countries".

The US has done a fine job of that already, we must learn from the pros. Because they use it when it suits them.

As do the Palestinian "apologists"....all is well...carry on.

[Oleg Bach]

The US and Iraq are actual "countries".

As do the Palestinian "apologists"....all is well...carry on.

You have an over load of Israeli apologists. Could it be that the average AMERICA big and small actually believe in that stero-typical thinking that the Jews rule the world economically and only Jews know how to generate money? I remember ALLAN GREENSPAN addressing congress - all the rich anglo congress men looked upon him like he was god...Israel is not god.

[myata]

So the difference here is that the Allied victors, when stripping the Axis powers of territory, or previously, the Treaty of Versailles, or previous to that the Congress of Vienna, were territorial modifications agreed upon by... victors... um...

Indeed the differences are many. You forgot to mention international recognition also.

I'm confused here. Israel beat down every solitary attempt to knock it back into the ocean, in the process inevitably taking ground (read: territory) which it then occupied. After all of this, Israel in fact gave big chunks of it back (ie. Sinai), but has essentially occupied areas, much as the Soviets booted the Japanese out of the Kurils and put Soviet colonists in, or most of the Germans were booted out of Bohemia and Danzig after the World Wars...

Don't be. Not one country in the world recognises Israel claims to territories it occupies. Or should we also open the history preceeding these wars? No, you want to keep international recognition of Israel, but ignore it (or absense of it) where it would go against Israel's claiming rights over occupied territories?

How logical.. and historical, too!

I'm really confused. What is the difference between Israel's defacto seizure of the Occupied Territories and, say, Bohemia? In the case of Bohemia, the Austro-Hungarian Empire gambled and lost, as was the case for Danzig (Germany is probably damn lucky they didn't lose other pieces of contested territory like Schleswig-Holstein), well, that was a gamble and lose, too. And the same goes for the Kurils as Japan's punishment.

Don't be. In some cases there were treaties which the loser signed. In others, international recognition of borders. None exists in this case. But of course you'll want it both ways, international recognition where it suits your views, or your views where they go against international recognition. You win either way, how smart indeed!

The lesson ought to be "Make war on your neighbors and they beat you, you lose territory", not "Make war on neighobors and they beat you, and you get to bitch and snivel and laud suicide bombers and rocket attacks on the victor over theoretical borders you in fact rejected until the end of time" with the added bonus that "bleeding heart radicals in the West will look the other way at your own atrocities, incompetence and corruption as they continue to rail against the guy that repeatedly kicked your ass."

And this lesson too: "move to somebody else's territory, smuggle guns and claim it for your own", correct? Generally, "right is might" (or "grab and hold" if you like it better) as the new (though not that long forgotten) and shining principle of our international policy.

Edited June 11, 2010 by myata

[M.Dancer]

I wonder when JB Globe will get around to fixing the post title?

... the 10 confirmed dead has been confirmed incorrent for quite awhile now...