eyeball Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Eventually, it's a realistic and practical fait accompli that many (not all) of these settlements and developments are never going to be dismantled. Any negotiations moving forward between Palestinians and Israeli have to be give-take instead of the all-or-nothing demands being made. Why negotiate when you can just keep taking what you want? Fait accompli is still a moving point in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 By that standard, since every Muslim country has Islamists in it we should halt all foreign aid to Muslim countries. No because 'muslim' countries aren't trying to overthrow their governments by definition. Furthermore, there is a difference between humanitarian aid and funding insurgency. Though that said, West should reconsider the aid it sends to Pakistan. Ah I see. You have insider information and know all their private thoughts and tactics, eh? Don't need insider information to understand the motive of the Harper government claiming the North Pole. And you actually think China will give a good goddam about such things? China!? When it comes to territorial claims China will spit in your face, kick you in the balls, and dare you to do anything about it. See this is one of the problems. Too many westerners do not understand the importance of having the moral high-ground and not being hypocritical for the effectiveness of foreign policy in the long run. Putin understands this, which is why he is winning (ex. Syria). So if the people in, say, southeastern BC voted to separate from Canada we'd recognize that? If any province or territory wishes to separate from Canada, I support their right to self-determination. I love how some of you guys take the attitude that you have this secret, ultra-accurate source of information that all the other dupes just don't get because we're only reading "western media" or "mainstream media". Yet whenever one of you posts one of your 'secret, super accurate" sites it turns out be a collection of nut cases raving about aliens and spidermonkeys. Or... you could get your information from multiple sources (with their own biases) and make an informed decision about what you think the truth is. Rather than rely solely on western mainstream media. Tens of billions of dollars. Where is your evidence of this claim? So the new one won't have the trappings of Communism. That doesn't make for an improvement when it retains the same aggressive, expansionist mindset. Yeah it does... Communism is sort of a bad economic system. Totalitarian communism is even worse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remiel Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Like what? Institution of the Supreme Court, Experimental Lakes Area, Census, to name a few. All of these have been reported on ad nauseum. The Senate. We all know it. Asking for examples in like asking I name murder victims to prove someone has been murdered in Canada: we all know it happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remiel Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 No, but if you're going to use the word 'platitude' you might as well use it in the sense that it actually has some relevant meaning. Does Harper spout platitudes? Sure! He does it every day, on a host of issues, just like every politician does. In terms of his support of Israel, however, his stance and his words are a far more principled, meaningful and significant (whether you agree with them or not) than the empty, automatic and consensus statements most of the UN diplomats are making. Having principles does not a bequeath a blank cheque As if the villains of this world were completely absent of any principles. Harper has none of the principles that actually make other principles laudable. Like, "Hamas has sole responsibility for the deaths in Gaza," ignores the existence of Islamic Jihad and sends the message that as long as you are on the right side of a fight you have no responsibility. That is morally and ethically horrendous. Everyone who kills has at least a shred of responsibility for their actions. To suggest otherwise is to endorse psychopathy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remiel Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 That statement is utter drivel without a shred of intelligent thought behind it. Says the guy making an ad hominem attack on another poster. Stephen Harper hates and despises much of Canada. Anyone who has not drank from the pitcher with the smiley face can see that all over his actions. If you think that is fine in a leader then you are complicit in that degeneracy. You think he can just burn everything to the ground and the rest of us should just put on the rose-coloured glasses and pretend that the people who support an autocrat are worth expending all of our energy improving and fighting for all they offer in return is a charred husk of a civil society? What kind of moron expects people to only act once they live in a bona fide dictatorship, instead of fighting its creation every step of the way, from democracy all the way on down the slope? The only difference between Stephen Harper and Rob Ford is intelligence. They are otherwise exactly the same. Narcissistic maniacs who think elections bestow divine rights on the elected rather than responsibilities to the electorate: the ENTIRE ELECTORATE. They dismantle the legitimacy of the state with as much stealth as they can muster, much like the takeovers of Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk. I am not bound from on high to give a damn about anyone who has a hard on for that reality. Those of you who follow Harper's every whim clearly do not, and if he is re-elected I stop caring about you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Why negotiate when you can just keep taking what you want? Fait accompli is still a moving point in the future. There comes a point where you can't take what you want. The rest of the world, if outraged enough, will move to stop you. This is what's starting to happen to Russia with Ukraine. Israel's settlement of 'occupied' lands, however, date back several decades and came about as a result of failed Arab invasions. Their blockade on Gaza ostensibly resulted from Hamas terror attacks. The world reasonably didn't have a lot of sympathy for the Arabs when their invasions failed and Israel pushed their borders outwards. The maintenance of that status-quo for decades, and subsequent settlement of these lands, almost makes them defacto Israeli territories. If, on the other hand, Israel attempted to subjugate and displace Gazans with Israeli settlers, they'd likely meet substantial resistance from the US and UN, and find themselves unable to continue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Having principles does not a bequeath a blank cheque As if the villains of this world were completely absent of any principles. Harper has none of the principles that actually make other principles laudable. Like, "Hamas has sole responsibility for the deaths in Gaza," ignores the existence of Islamic Jihad and sends the message that as long as you are on the right side of a fight you have no responsibility. That is morally and ethically horrendous. Everyone who kills has at least a shred of responsibility for their actions. To suggest otherwise is to endorse psychopathy. I wouldn't argue with that, but at the same time I would disagree with the implied notion that Israel is just carpet bombing Gaza and targeting indiscriminately. The old saying is that Israel protects its children with weapons, and Hamas protects its weapons with children. When Hamas fires mortars or launches rockets just outside a school, and Israel fires back at them, who's really to blame there? The IDF in this case has two options. Either they fire back and hope not to hit civilians (which isn't always the case) or they continue to take fire without being able to retaliate. The only reasonable option, unfortunately, is the one that makes for great PR victory on Hamas' behalf. Showing pictures and videos of dead/injured children and old people is what they've wanted the whole time. Hamas never intended to fight any sort of real battle here. They merely wanted to draw the IDF in force into Gaza and encourage as many civilian casualties as possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 If, on the other hand, Israel attempted to subjugate and displace Gazans with Israeli settlers, they'd likely meet substantial resistance from the US and UN, and find themselves unable to continue. They HAVE been doing this in various parts of the occupied territories, and nobody does anything but talk. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remiel Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 I would not say Israel is carpet bombing Gaza at all. In fact, few things make me angrier right now than the suggestion they should. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 There comes a point where you can't take what you want. The rest of the world, if outraged enough, will move to stop you. Except when this is the direction most of the world or at least that part of it that has the wherewithal to do any stopping is also moving in the same direction. There comes a point if many are not already past it, when not taking what you want is not an option. Take the taking of water and other resources for example. As I've pointed out if not here than other similarly threads, when it's a good enough direction for some of the shiniest beacons in the world to lead, who can fault others for following? Shouldn't there be a point at which we drop the pretenses and recognize the increasingly pagan nature of pursuing national/economic/religious/etc etc, interests? The method of pursuit is not what matters. Not anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 They HAVE been doing this in various parts of the occupied territories, and nobody does anything but talk. Like how they planned to dislocate ~30-40,000 Bedouins in 2011, but then cancelled the plan due to UN outrage and publicity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbox Posted July 31, 2014 Report Share Posted July 31, 2014 Except when this is the direction most of the world or at least that part of it that has the wherewithal to do any stopping is also moving in the same direction. There comes a point if many are not already past it, when not taking what you want is not an option. Take the taking of water and other resources for example. As I've pointed out if not here than other similarly threads, when it's a good enough direction for some of the shiniest beacons in the world to lead, who can fault others for following? Shouldn't there be a point at which we drop the pretenses and recognize the increasingly pagan nature of pursuing national/economic/religious/etc etc, interests? The method of pursuit is not what matters. Not anymore. Sorry eyeball, but I'm having a tough time understanding what you're saying exactly. Is this an anti-Imperalism comment, or something more nuanced that I'm not understanding? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Guy Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 The closer it gets to the next election the better seems Trudeau's pro pot stand. Recent polls indicate an overwhelming majority of voters wanting to relax anti-pot laws. Not sure if the majority wants complete decriminalization but the speed at which public opinion has shifted is surprising. An issue that first appeared to be a weakness for the Liberals in the next campaign may end up being a strength. Who would have figured? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Sorry eyeball, but I'm having a tough time understanding what you're saying exactly. Is this an anti-Imperalism comment, or something more nuanced that I'm not understanding? Yes and yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonam Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 (edited) The closer it gets to the next election the better seems Trudeau's pro pot stand. Recent polls indicate an overwhelming majority of voters wanting to relax anti-pot laws. Not sure if the majority wants complete decriminalization but the speed at which public opinion has shifted is surprising. An issue that first appeared to be a weakness for the Liberals in the next campaign may end up being a strength. Unless the conservatives realize the trend in time for the election and preempt Trudeau with their own legalization/decriminalization bill. Edited August 1, 2014 by Bonam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Unless the conservatives realize the trend in time for the election and preempt Trudeau with their own legalization/decriminalization bill. I think Harper has boxed himself into a corner on that one. His stupid mandatory minimum sentences for simple pot possession were, like every move he makes, brought about to appeal to his voter base. His autocratic ego would never allow him to admit he was wrong. JT is likely having a good old giggle over this latest pot poll. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hal 9000 Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Does anyone even care that we work (those of us that do work) until August before we make even a dime for ourselves? Trudeau is gonna raise taxes even higher but he won't say how much or even where the tax money will go. But hey, lets trade that off for legalized pot - real smart! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Amazing happening in our politics. The person leading the polls (son of Trudeau) almost never talks off the cuff to reporters - and it seems that reporters don't try very hard to get him to talk freely. Yes, I realize he's appeared to have made a couple of bone head statements - but surely they were taken out of context? Why don't we ever get to hear from this guy? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 As has been said and appears to be true, Trudeau can afford to sit back and let Harper dig his own grave. Harper's actions are speaking louder than Trudeau's words. Bone-headed statements just don't stack up against bone-headed moves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guyser Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Why don't we ever get to hear from this guy? Oh thats easy, I checked the calendar and yup...its summer . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 No because 'muslim' countries aren't trying to overthrow their governments by definition. So? What is it to us if Muslims overthrow a government which is hostile to us anyway? Don't need insider information to understand the motive of the Harper government claiming the North Pole. To be evil? See this is one of the problems. Too many westerners do not understand the importance of having the moral high-ground and not being hypocritical for the effectiveness of foreign policy in the long run. Putin understands this, which is why he is winning (ex. Syria). Are you suggesting Putin has the moral high ground on anything at all? If any province or territory wishes to separate from Canada, I support their right to self-determination. Eastern Ukraine, like Eastern BC, is not a province or territory... Or... you could get your information from multiple sources (with their own biases) and make an informed decision about what you think the truth is. Rather than rely solely on western mainstream media. Let me guess: RT and Al Jazeera? Where is your evidence of this claim? Stop being silly. Yeah it does... Communism is sort of a bad economic system. Totalitarian communism is even worse. Who gives a damn about its economics? The issue here is Russia's aggressively hostile expansionism. Whether the dictator behind it is Communist, Fascist or somewhere in between is largely irrelevant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Institution of the Supreme Court, Experimental Lakes Area, Census, to name a few. All of these have been reported on ad nauseum. The Senate. We all know it. Asking for examples in like asking I name murder victims to prove someone has been murdered in Canada: we all know it happens. Your statement was 'everything he touches turns to manure". He has appointed the majority of the Supreme Court, and evidently, from what I read, most people feel those appointments were good ones. The SC continues to function. I drove past it the other morning, and there was no smell of manure. Care to explain yourself further? The senate is as useless and as big a waste of money as ever, but no moreso. The Census continues to function. We know roughly how many people are here and what they do. Methinks you exaggerate -- hysterically so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Having principles does not a bequeath a blank cheque As if the villains of this world were completely absent of any principles. Harper has none of the principles that actually make other principles laudable. Like, "Hamas has sole responsibility for the deaths in Gaza," ignores the existence of Islamic Jihad and sends the message that as long as you are on the right side of a fight you have no responsibility. That is morally and ethically horrendous. Everyone who kills has at least a shred of responsibility for their actions. To suggest otherwise is to endorse psychopathy. Nonsense. Islamic Jihad couldn't exist without Hamas tolerating them. And since Hamas is the attacker, and refuses to stop attacking, it follows logically that they bear responsibility for what follows. Those who kill in self defense have no particular moral responsibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 Says the guy making an ad hominem attack on another poster. Calling your words stupid is not an ad hominem. Stephen Harper hates and despises much of Canada. Another moronic statement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted August 1, 2014 Report Share Posted August 1, 2014 I would not say Israel is carpet bombing Gaza at all. In fact, few things make me angrier right now than the suggestion they should. If the Israelis had the same sense of morality as the Syrians, or, for that matter, the Russians, that is precisely what they would be doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
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.