Sir Bandelot Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) How nice. But, it still isn't true. It is true. It is historical fact that these things happened, and the points you raised to do not nullify those facts. What's become apparent now in this thread is that there are two divergent arguments. On the one hand I raised the point, to compare the Jewish/ Palestinian conflict with the invasions of Poland and Russia during WWII or thereabouts is not valid, as Palestinians were not the initial aggressors. This was refuted with claims that Palestinian arabs were the aggressors, that Jews were defending their sovereignty. When I pointed out that the UN partitioned the land to give the Jews an official protected homeland, recognized by western nations it was refuted by saying the Jews took it by their own hand. Do you people speaky from both sides of mouthy? It seems so. I prefer to just state the facts. Since I am not a Jew or an Arab, I have no vested interests to protect or defend either of them. My position in fact also criticizes Canada as well, in fact the whole of the western world was complicit in the holocaust so I sympathize with people who are bound to be a bit 'touchy' in regards to the history of that region. In the end as always, I defer to the rights of the smallest person, the ones who are caught up in the conflict of the greater powers. Today Obama et al are just as manipulative of that region for their own interests, as the British or the UN were when this situation was created. That is the sad condition of affairs and it will continue forever. What makes it continue are people with one-track minds who speak half truths to try and convince themselves and pledge allegiance to evil. For the record I will say, in my opinion the west is wholly responsible right from day one, some two thousand years ago. The blame rests on our shoulders as an empire, right up to today right up to now, even with people like DogOnPorch who seek to make it a nazi problem. That is why the Jews should never depend on us. Edited July 3, 2011 by Sir Bandelot Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 ...as Palestinians were not the initial aggressors. Bull sh!t. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 Care to elaborate? Yeah...the first pogroms occured in 1920...right after Husseini was made Grand Mufti. If your history starts in 1948, the Mufti's men were the first into the fight even before their Arab allies showed-up from all sides. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 And Sir B...I'm not Jewish or Arab. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 Europeans started indulging in the very 1st pogroms 2000 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom#Pogroms_against_Jews Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
eyeball Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 And Sir B...I'm not Jewish or Arab. I bet you're European though. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
DogOnPorch Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 I bet you're European though. Nope...Canadian born n' raised. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 Europeans started indulging in the very 1st pogroms 2000 years ago. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pogrom#Pogroms_against_Jews Yup...now what's the point of this History 101 statement? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) Yup...now what's the point of this History 101 statement? You tell me the point of the statement you made about "If your history starts..." and chances are you'll find mine is very similar. Edited July 3, 2011 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
DogOnPorch Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 You tell me the point of the statement you made about "If your history starts..." and chances are you'll find mine is very similar. I'm not denying the Christian Blood Libel unlike some posters re: the National Socialist Arab connection. So again...what is the point of your statement? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 That it doesn't matter where your history starts. Where it end up does though. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
DogOnPorch Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 That it doesn't matter where your history starts. Where it end up does though. That means absolutely nothing. Running for office in your area? Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
WIP Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 Incorrect. After WWII (in 1948) Jews fought for and won Israel's independence, in the face of invading Arab hordes that wanted to kill every last Jew, and "western powers" did not lift a finger to help them. In fact, right up until 1949, the British were still holding Jews in concentration camps on Cyprus. Jews returned the land to themselves, they were not "given" anything. I think everyone who claims to be a rationalist has a special obligation to explore information from all sides of a conflict, and not just one sided propaganda. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
WIP Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 It is true. It is historical fact that these things happened, and the points you raised to do not nullify those facts. What's become apparent now in this thread is that there are two divergent arguments. On the one hand I raised the point, to compare the Jewish/ Palestinian conflict with the invasions of Poland and Russia during WWII or thereabouts is not valid, as Palestinians were not the initial aggressors. This was refuted with claims that Palestinian arabs were the aggressors, that Jews were defending their sovereignty. When I pointed out that the UN partitioned the land to give the Jews an official protected homeland, recognized by western nations it was refuted by saying the Jews took it by their own hand. The thread question itself is waste of time to begin with; since it implies that permanent Israeli Occupation and expulsion of Palestinians is justified if another historical example can be found somewhere else in the world. I have ancestors on my mother's side of the family who came from this area...which all used to be part of Prussia. Some of them left before the start of WWI, and some left after being forced out to create that Polish Corridor after the War. For whatever reasons, Germans are not Palestinians -- once they left, they did not harbour dreams or desires to return, like some old Palestinians who kept the door keys of their old houses and settled into a life of permanent refugee. Obviously religion is the core problem here, and yet these Hitchens-type Neocon atheists ignore the contributions to religious strife caused by Judaism, especially Orthodox Judaism -- how do you argue with someone who claims that your land was given to him by God and you have to get out? But despite its relatively secular beginnings, manifest destiny is what Zionism is all about! If it was just a matter of needing a place for a Jewish homeland, they could have just taken some unoccupied territory to set up their own state. Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
DogOnPorch Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 I think everyone who claims to be a rationalist has a special obligation to explore information from all sides of a conflict, and not just one sided propaganda. That one side is 'propaganda' should tell the reader where you all are coming from. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) That means absolutely nothing. Running for office in your area? What don't you get? Edited July 3, 2011 by eyeball Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Bonam Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 I think everyone who claims to be a rationalist has a special obligation to explore information from all sides of a conflict, and not just one sided propaganda. I have. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 -- how do you argue with someone who claims that your land was given to him by God and you have to get out? But despite its relatively secular beginnings, manifest destiny is what Zionism is all about!... Well...yea...it's kinda like a queen or king in England saying all the land belongs to a 'crown'. Go figure.... Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Bonam Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 The thread question itself is waste of time to begin with; since it implies that permanent Israeli Occupation and expulsion of Palestinians is justified if another historical example can be found somewhere else in the world. I have ancestors on my mother's side of the family who came from this area...which all used to be part of Prussia. Some of them left before the start of WWI, and some left after being forced out to create that Polish Corridor after the War. For whatever reasons, Germans are not Palestinians -- once they left, they did not harbour dreams or desires to return, like some old Palestinians who kept the door keys of their old houses and settled into a life of permanent refugee. So Germans moved on with their lives and within a few decades were prospering again, like rational people should. Meanwhile, the Palestinians refused to do so, behaving like immature idiots, and as a result continue to live in poor conditions to this day. And for this they should be rewarded? But despite its relatively secular beginnings, manifest destiny is what Zionism is all about! Manifest destiny was itself also a secular construct. Anyway, Israel seems content to retain the territory it presently controls, and even give away some of it in a future deal with the Palestinians when they gain some credibility, hence the analogy fails. If it was just a matter of needing a place for a Jewish homeland, they could have just taken some unoccupied territory to set up their own state. Unoccupied territory eh? Where? On Mars? Or perhaps in Antarctica? Quote
bloodyminded Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 (edited) Obviously religion is the core problem here, and yet these Hitchens-type Neocon atheists ignore the contributions to religious strife caused by Judaism, especially Orthodox Judaism -- how do you argue with someone who claims that your land was given to him by God and you have to get out? But despite its relatively secular beginnings, manifest destiny is what Zionism is all about! If it was just a matter of needing a place for a Jewish homeland, they could have just taken some unoccupied territory to set up their own state. I'm no big fan of Hitchens, but he has been extremely, harshly critical about Zionism. (A lot more than I would be, incidentally.) A more interesting question, to me, is why those who denigrate "anti-semites" for saying a lot less about it than Hitchens prefer to give the Great Man a pass when he's far more critical of Israel than most? Anti-semitism, it would appear, is not about one's views of matters-Israel...but about unrelated matters entirely. Hitchens is a raving anti-semite (note: I don't think that for one second; but following the narrative logic of the way these debates are framed, it's "true"; that is, by his own admirers' standards, he is a true, obnoxiously bigoted Jew-hater, far worse than the norm). However, since they like what he says on other topics....well, suddenly anti-semitism is of zero significance. Edited July 3, 2011 by bloodyminded Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
jacee Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 Manifest destiny was itself also a secular construct. Anyway, Israel seems content to retain the territory it presently controls, . . . Is Israel not still expanding settlements into new areas and controlling Gaza? Quote
DogOnPorch Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 What don't you get? How a bright fellow like yourself would spout off axioms and figure that'll do for an answer. I know fire is hot. So do you. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
eyeball Posted July 3, 2011 Report Posted July 3, 2011 How a bright fellow like yourself would spout off axioms and figure that'll do for an answer. I know fire is hot. So do you. So you do know that using your own arbitrary start point in history is a mug's game. Good, just checking. Quote I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.