jbg Posted January 2, 2015 Report Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) Below are examples of quotes referencing the "international community" or "world opinion." These are terms that are easy to come to the lips or the fingertips (rhyme not intentional). There is little or no analysis of what either term means, or what constitutes the "international community" or "world opinion." This has allowed for some extremely weak thought processes and reasoning.The world's population at some time during 2013 was7.125 billion people. I don't think any reputable pollsters are out gauging the opinion of the people of the world on any given topic. By necessity, the views of the "international community" are taken as the view of the "leaders" of countries, typically at the U.N. level or from statements to the media by the actual heads of state or prime ministers. As anyone listening to the opening speeches at the U.N. General Assembly knows, some of these speeches border on deranged. As for the opinion of actual people, how would it be influenced if they knew who the donors of foreign aid were? This is a link to a map of donor countries (link). The image itself can be viewed but the link is byond a paywall so I couldn't post it. Would it surprise anyone here that the top ten donor countries are all Western democracies? Is anyone surprised that Israel had the first mobile hospital units (link) on the scenes of the Haiti earthquake and Philippine typhoon?Would the impoverished people of the world be forumlating the view of the "international community" ably expressed below if they were not kept ignorant of these facts? Thoughts? Everybody knows that the taking of the Golan Heights (opposed by most of the international community) was only a defensive measure required for Israeli security. As I have been saying repeatedly, the Israeli policy on Gaza is completely misdirected. The Israeli policy on new settlements is a mistake and the international community is moving towards a support of Palestine. The international community does not recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, and the city hosts no foreign embassies. Mind you, the US is pretty much the only world power these days, especially if you consider that no one in the governments of Russia or China would possibly care how many innocent people were slaughtered by their own governments or how they were slaughtered. In fact, Putin probably would have used chemical weapons on Chechins had he not feared world opinion.So substantiating that world opinion, making it very painful for anyone to use chemical weapons, is a principle which the west has clung to for almost a century now. Apparently, a lot of people no longer care, though. Edited January 2, 2015 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
WIP Posted January 2, 2015 Report Posted January 2, 2015 Below are examples of quotes referencing the "international community" or "world opinion." These are terms that are easy to come to the lips or the fingertips (rhyme not intentional). There is little or no analysis of what either term means, or what constitutes the "international community" or "world opinion." This has allowed for some extremely weak thought processes and reasoning.The world's population at some time during 2013 was7.125 billion people. I don't think any reputable pollsters are out gauging the opinion of the people of the world on any given topic. By necessity, the views of the "international community" are taken as the view of the "leaders" of countries, typically at the U.N. level or from statements to the media by the actual heads of state or prime ministers. As anyone listening to the opening speeches at the U.N. General Assembly knows, some of these speeches border on deranged. As for the opinion of actual people, how would it be influenced if they knew who the donors of foreign aid were? This is a link to a map of donor countries (link). The image itself can be viewed but the link is byond a paywall so I couldn't post it. Would it surprise anyone here that the top ten donor countries are all Western democracies? Is anyone surprised that Israel had the first mobile hospital units (link) on the scenes of the Haiti earthquake and Philippine typhoon? Would the impoverished people of the world be forumlating the view of the "international community" ably expressed below if they were not kept ignorant of these facts? Thoughts? Well, my thoughts are that sending a medivac unit to the Philippines might be good PR over there, but it's not going to be enough to eliminate the stench from revelations about Israel's profiting from death and destruction: “The Lab”: Israel Tests Weapons, Tactics On Captive Palestinian Population By Jonathan CookIn June defense analysts at Jane’s put Israel in sixth place, ahead of China and Italy, both major weapons producers. Surveys that include Israel’s growing covert trade put it even higher—in fourth place, ahead of Britain and Germany, and beaten only by the United States, Russia and France. The extent of Israel’s success in this market can be gauged by a simple mathematical calculation. With record sales last year of $7 billion, Israel earned nearly $1,000 per capita from the arms trade—up to 10 times the per capita income the United States derives from its weapons industry. The Israeli economy’s huge reliance on arms dealing was underscored in July, when local courts forced officials to reveal data showing that some 6,800 Israelis are actively engaged in exporting arms. Traditionally Israel’s arms industry was run by the Defense Ministry, as a series of state-owned corporations developing weapons systems for the Israeli army. But with the rise of the hi-tech industries in Israel over the past decade, a new generation of officers recently discharged from the army saw the opportunity to use their military experience and their continuing connections to the army to develop and test new armaments, for sale both to Israel and foreign buyers. In the process Israel’s arms industry was reinvented as a major player in the Israeli economy, now accounting for a fifth of all exports. Or as Leo Gleser, who runs an arms consultancy firm that specializes in developing new markets in Latin America, observes: “The [israeli] defense minister doesn’t only deal with wars, he also makes sure the defense industry is busy selling goods.” Gleser is one of several arms dealers interviewed in a new documentary that lifts the lid on the nature and scope of Israel’s arms business. “The Lab,” which won a recent award at DocAviv, Israel’s documentary Oscars, is due to premiere in the U.S. in August. Directed by Yotam Feldman, the film presents the first close-up view of Israel’s arms industry and the dealers who have enriched themselves. The title relates to the film’s central argument: that Israel has rapidly come to rely on the continuing captivity of Palestinians in what are effectively the world’s largest open-air prisons. The reason is that there are massive profits to be made from testing Israeli military innovations on the more than four million Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. According to Feldman, that trend began with Operation Defensive Shield, Israel’s re-invasion of the West Bank and Gaza in 2002, which formally reversed the process of Israeli territorial withdrawals initiated by the Oslo accords. Following that operation, many army officers went into private business, and starting in 2005 Israel’s arms industry started to break new records, at $2 billion a year. But the biggest surge in sales followed Operation Cast Lead, Israel’s month-long assault on Gaza in winter 2008-09, which killed more than 1,400 Palestinians and 13 Israelis. Record sales in the wake of that attack reached $6 billion. These military operations, including the most recent against Gaza, last year’s Pillar of Cloud, the film argues, serve as little more than laboratory-style experiments to evaluate and refine the effectiveness of new military approaches, both strategies and weaponry. Gaza, in particular, has become the shop window for Israel’s military industries, allowing them to develop and market systems for long-term surveillance, control and subjugation of an “enemy” population. Given that most Palestinians are now tightly contained in urban settings, traditional policies designed to maintain a distinction between civilians and fighters have had to be erased. Amiram Levin, former head of the Israeli army’s northern command in the 1990s and now an arms dealer, is filmed at an arms industry conference observing that Israel’s goal in the territories is punishment of the local population to create greater “room for maneuver.” Considering the effects, he comments that most Palestinians “were born to die—we just have to help them.” The film highlights the kind of inventions for which Israel has become feted by foreign security services. It pioneered robotic killing machines such as the airborne drones that are now at the heart of the U.S. program of extra-judicial executions in the Middle East. It hopes to repeat that success with missile interception systems such as Iron Dome, which goes on display every time a rocket is fired out of Gaza. Israel also specializes in turning improbably futuristic weapons into reality, such as the gun that shoots around corners. Not surprisingly, Hollywood is also a customer, with Angelina Jolie marketing the bullet-bending firearm in the film “Wanted.” But the unexpected “stars” of “The Lab” are not smooth-talking salesmen but former Israeli officers turned academics, whose theories have helped to guide the Israeli army and hi-tech companies in developing new military techniques and arsenals. Theorists of DeathShimon Naveh, a manically excited philosopher, paces through a mock Arab village that provided the canvas on which he devised a new theory of urban warfare during the second intifada. In the run-up to an attack on Nablus’ casbah in 2002, much feared by the Israeli army for its labyrinthine layout, he suggested that the soldiers move not through the alleyways, where they would be easy targets, but unseen through the buildings, knocking holes through the walls that separated the houses. Naveh’s idea became the key to crushing Palestinian armed resistance, exposing the only places—in the heart of overcrowded cities and refugee camps—where Palestinian fighters could still find sanctuary from Israeli surveillance. Another expert, Yitzhak Ben Israel, a former general turned professor at Tel Aviv University, helped to develop a mathematical formula that predicts the likely success of assassination programs to end organized resistance. Ben Israel’s calculus proved to the army that a Palestinian cell planning an attack could be destroyed with high probability by “neutralizing” as few as a fifth of its fighters. It is precisely this merging of theory, hardware and repeated “testing” in the field that has armies, police forces and the homeland security industries of the U.S., Europe, Asia and Latin America lining up to buy Israeli know-how. The lessons learned in Gaza and the West Bank have useful applications, the film makes clear, in Afghanistan and Iraq. Or as Benjamin Ben Eliezer, a former defense minister turned industry minister, explains in the film, Israel’s advantage is that “people like to buy things that have been tested. If Israel sells weapons, they have been tested, tried out. We can say we’ve used this 10 years, 15 years.” Yoav Galant, head of the Israeli army’s southern command during Cast Lead, points out: “While certain countries in Europe or Asia condemned us for attacking civilians, they sent their officers here, and I briefed generals from 10 countries so they could understand how we reached such a low ratio [of Palestinian civilian deaths—Galant’s false claim that most of those killed were Palestinian fighters]. “There’s a lot of hypocrisy: they condemn you politically, while they ask you what your trick is, you Israelis, for turning blood into money.” The film’s convincing thesis, however, offers a disturbing message to those who hope for an end to Israel’s occupation of Palestine. That is because, as Israel has made its arsenal more lethal and its soldiers ever safer, Israeli society has become increasingly tolerant of war as the background noise of life. If Israelis pay no price for war, then the army and politicians face no pressure to end it. Rather, the pressure acts in the opposite direction. With the occupied territories serving as an ideal laboratory, regular attacks on Palestinians to test and showcase its military systems provide Israel with a business model far more lucrative than one offered by a peace agreement. Or as Naftali Bennett, the far-right industry minister, observed—both hopefully and euphemistically—after a trip to China in July: “No one on earth is interested in the Palestinian issue. What interests the world from Beijing to Washington to Brussels is Israeli high-tech.” But possibly worse still, as foreign governments line up to learn from Israel’s experience, the question arises: who else among us faces a Palestinian future? So, my guess is that the leaders of these nations, who never express much criticism of Israel - I can't help noticing in recent times, that even Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt and other Sunni-majority Muslim nations would be foaming at the mouth every time Israel started bombing the West Bank or Gaza, and now, they have nothing to say! Could it be because they are also secret allies of Israel? They are likely lined up somewhere (perhaps behind third parties) getting access to Israeli-tested weapons and counter-insurgency tactics, just like the Americans, the Europeans and the South American militaries......you should be proud! But, I doubt any of this wins hearts and minds around the world! Israel might be able to win big weapons contracts, and protect itself as it gradually removes intransigent, non-compliant Arabs off the territories they claim for new settlers; but many people around the world who see their own governments as oppressive forces who carry out the will of despots and foreign business interests, aren't going to be filled with warm thoughts about nations like the U.S. and Israel, who make it impossible to overthrow these regimes, either by the ballot/or through armed uprising! Quote Anybody who believers exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist. -- Kenneth Boulding, 1973
jbg Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 Well, my thoughts are that sending a medivac unit to the Philippines might be good PR over there, but it's not going to be enough to eliminate the stench from revelations about Israel's profiting from death and destruction:This was not meant to be another Israel thread. I'll leave that work to Hudson Jones, Marcus and PrimeNumber. This thread is about the dubious recourse to "international community" or "world opinion" blather to justify otherwise weak positions. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Big Guy Posted January 2, 2015 Report Posted January 2, 2015 I submit that a position is "weak" or "strong" depending on the subjective views of the individual doing the evaluation. The only official forum for world opinion is the United Nations. One may not agree with some of the decisions and actions but that is the only venue where all nations have a right to speak and be heard. The structure still allows the bigger nations to veto any resolution but it also allows even the smallest nation to express its opinion of what another nation is doing. Currently, there are 193 members. When I refer to "world opinion" I look towards the resolutions passed by this world body. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
jbg Posted January 2, 2015 Author Report Posted January 2, 2015 I submit that a position is "weak" or "strong" depending on the subjective views of the individual doing the evaluation. The only official forum for world opinion is the United Nations. One may not agree with some of the decisions and actions but that is the only venue where all nations have a right to speak and be heard. The structure still allows the bigger nations to veto any resolution but it also allows even the smallest nation to express its opinion of what another nation is doing. Currently, there are 193 members. When I refer to "world opinion" I look towards the resolutions passed by this world body. So you consider a subsidized debating society, many of whom represent people who are illiterate, to constitute "world opinion" of the "international community"? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Big Guy Posted January 2, 2015 Report Posted January 2, 2015 (edited) I guess some people would consider a democracy where "illiterates" are allowed to vote and voice their opinions as a waste of time and not representative. I do not. If one feels that only rich nations or only populous nations or only white nations or only Christian nations or English speaking nations or only ... represent world opinion I would disagree. I also see no difficulty with allowing debate on any issue to allow everyone to state their opinion. I also believe that any valid governing organization allows representation by population AND representation by region - like the American Congress and Senate. As for the UN, that appears to be the only organization that is not a military association and does allow membership of every nation on earth. I do not know of another that allows the same debate. So, as a short answer to your question - yes. Edited January 2, 2015 by Big Guy Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
jbg Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Posted January 4, 2015 I guess some people would consider a democracy where "illiterates" are allowed to vote and voice their opinions as a waste of time and not representative. I do not. If one feels that only rich nations or only populous nations or only white nations or only Christian nations or English speaking nations or only ... represent world opinion I would disagree. I also see no difficulty with allowing debate on any issue to allow everyone to state their opinion. I also believe that any valid governing organization allows representation by population AND representation by region - like the American Congress and Senate. As for the UN, that appears to be the only organization that is not a military association and does allow membership of every nation on earth. I do not know of another that allows the same debate. So, as a short answer to your question - yes. I repeat my point; are the people of these Third and Fourth world counties aware of where their largesse comes from? Or who is stealingit along the way? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
jacee Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 I repeat my point; are the people of these Third and Fourth world counties aware of where their largesse comes from? Or who is stealingit along the way? jbg this is a ridiculous discussion. 'world opinion' becomes apparent in general distaste where once was support. Politicians are bound to represent the views of their people. And nobody wants to defend the slaughter of innocents as a testing ground for profiting from arms sales. . Quote Rapists, pedophiles, and nazis post online too.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Krikey....."slaughter of innocents" for "Conflict Dirt Farm" isn't even top ten in the world or world discussion, yet Israel gets the most hate. Typical. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
jacee Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Krikey....."slaughter of innocents" for "Conflict Dirt Farm" isn't even top ten in the world or world discussion, yet Israel gets the most hate. Typical.Palestine is the topic.It seemed relevant. . Quote Rapists, pedophiles, and nazis post online too.
jbg Posted January 4, 2015 Author Report Posted January 4, 2015 Politicians are bound to represent the views of their people. Do you think the average Cuban supports Castro? Ask those who risked leaky boats to make the 90 mile trip. Or North Koreans who risk life and limb to flee. Yeah, why don't you ask those people. Palestine is the topic. It seemed relevant. . This is not about Palestine. It is about the alleged consensus among the "international community" constituting "world opinion." I got a question for you; what is the "world opinion" of the hermit kingdom of North Korea? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Palestine is the topic. It seemed relevant. . Sure..."slaughter of innocents" is always a favorite for Israel bashers, but "world opinion" likes to ignore all the rest. Hmmmm...wonder why ? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
jacee Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) dp. Edited January 4, 2015 by jacee Quote Rapists, pedophiles, and nazis post online too.
Big Guy Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 I believe that we make too many mistakes when we try to evaluate the will of the people - in other countries. Like the USA in the Bay of Pigs invasion where the group of American "insurgents" invaded Cuba in anticipation of the populace rising up to revolt and join the next revolution to oust Castro. And we have Afghanistan where the Western "liberators" would come in and free the populace from the Taliban The people would rise and join the West to create a permanent democracy. As to world opinion, I guess one would probably define it in any terms that would be favourable to the definer. In theory, If everybody was allowed to vote then an opinion could be garnered by the majority of the 7 billion votes. Short of that, we could give voice to each of the different social/political associations called nations. The UN is the closest to allowing to gather that opinion. One could argue that if you do not have the bomb then you should not get a vote. Then Military might would identify whose opinion is "world" or not. Might does tend to be right. This whole question began through the question of Israel as to the "world opinion" of its actions. I doubt that Israel cares about world opinion and continues its expansion no matter UN resolutions, international criticism or potential grave consequences. Those who support Israel follow down that perilous road. Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
PrimeNumber Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Is anyone surprised that Israel had the first mobile hospital units (link) on the scenes of the Haiti earthquake and Philippine typhoon? Krikey....."slaughter of innocents" for "Conflict Dirt Farm" isn't even top ten in the world or world discussion, yet Israel gets the most hate. Typical. Sure..."slaughter of innocents" is always a favorite for Israel bashers, but "world opinion" likes to ignore all the rest. Hmmmm...wonder why ? This was not meant to be another Israel thread. I'll leave that work to Hudson Jones, Marcus and PrimeNumber. This thread is about the dubious recourse to "international community" or "world opinion" blather to justify otherwise weak positions. You and you're buddy Bush have that covered without our help. Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
jacee Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Do you think the average Cuban supports Castro? Ask those who risked leaky boats to make the 90 mile trip. Or North Koreans who risk life and limb to flee. Yeah, why don't you ask those people. This is not about Palestine. It is about the alleged consensus among the "international community" constituting "world opinion." I got a question for you; what is the "world opinion" of the hermit kingdom of North Korea? This is the most scattered and meaningless post I've ever seen. You made it about Palestine & Israel in the context you provided in the op. It's obvious to everybody (world opinion) that Israel is having childish hissy fits that Palestine is unilaterally pursuing independence instead of remaining slaves to whatever breadcrumbs Israel throws its way, having already usurped Palestine's resources and land for illegal settlements. Deflecting the discussion to 'what is world opinion' in an attempt to prove there is no such thing is just silly: Of course there is, and of course Israel's reputation in the world is suffering from its own aggressive overreactions both military and political blackmail. Israel is isolating itself. That's a fact. . Quote Rapists, pedophiles, and nazis post online too.
Bonam Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 I guess some people would consider a democracy where "illiterates" are allowed to vote and voice their opinions as a waste of time and not representative. I do not. But the united nations is not a democracy. Specifically, a lot of the governments represented at the UN are not democratic... dictatorships, monarchies, and "nominal democracies" abound. The UN represents the leaders of the world's nations, but it does not represent the people of those nations. Quote
Rue Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 (edited) Jacee again you are not debating the issue raised just calling names. When you preface a comment such as "its obvious' that's not a position, or a reason or basis for a conclusion, its the opposite, its the avoidance of stating a basis for your position.Why not just say "cuz I said so!". That is all it means. At no time did JBG postulate there is NO world opinion. You really do need to read his thread before you go off on a tangent and respond to a position he never made. What he was questioning and I do to, is the method in which "world opinion" is raised by anti Israelis on this board. Its never done with any objective methodology, just an aside like you just did in your latest response. You stat isn't it obvious...well why is it obvious....can you even state why and how you concluded it was obvious....did you do a survey? DId you travel the world and ask everyone on the planet what they thought? Is it obvious or in fact do you just assume your opinion is the one all others share except for a bunch of Israelis, some Zionist Jews and maybe some right wing nasties? Do you really think you have a handle on world opinion when you throw it out as being obvious? I do not. I think you just assume the world agrees with you. Edited January 4, 2015 by Rue Quote I come to you to hell.
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 ....Deflecting the discussion to 'what is world opinion' in an attempt to prove there is no such thing is just silly: Of course there is, and of course Israel's reputation in the world is suffering from its own aggressive overreactions both military and political blackmail. Let us know when "world opinion" is ready to back itself up with military force. I know damn well that Israel and its allies sure will. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
PrimeNumber Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 This was not meant to be another Israel thread. I'll leave that work to Hudson Jones, Marcus and PrimeNumber. This thread is about the dubious recourse to "international community" or "world opinion" blather to justify otherwise weak positions. Jacee again you are not debating the issue raised just calling names. When you preface a comment such as "its obvious' that's not a position, or a reason or basis for a conclusion, its the opposite, its the avoidance of stating a basis for your position.Why not just say "cuz I said so!". That is all it means. At no time did JBG postulate there is NO world opinion. You really do need to read his thread before you go off on a tangent and respond to a position he never made. What he was questioning and I do to, is the method in which "world opinion" is raised by anti Israelis on this board. Its never done with any objective methodology, just an aside like you just did in your latest response. You stat isn't it obvious...well why is it obvious....can you even state why and how you concluded it was obvious....did you do a survey? DId you travel the world and ask everyone on the planet what they thought? Is it obvious or in fact do you just assume your opinion is the one all others share except for a bunch of Israelis, some Zionist Jews and maybe some right wing nasties? Do you really think you have a handle on world opinion when you throw it out as being obvious? I do not. I think you just assume the world agrees with you. Maybe you should revise that old post to include yourself, Bush and now Rue. Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
Rue Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 "World opinion" is a vane reference to a primal concept. People think they are safe in numbers and when their "pack" is bigger then their perceived opponent's pack, they are stronger and more credible. The reference to world opinion is an attempt to validate the anti Israeli opinion by suggesting large amounts hate Israel so it must be hateful. It's a simple primal level of reasoning, well if everyone hates you, it must be true. We are just back in grade school where gangs of popular kids pointed out the lone ones and made fun of them. Its a reasoning that relies on safety in numbers. That is primal pack behaviour-the notion one pack is bigger than the other and therefore its size makes it more credible. It is of course illogical. Merit, credibility, comes not from popularity or simply size of one's chosen membrane. But hey some people love to play the my pee pee is bigger than your pee pee card any chance they are given. Quote I come to you to hell.
Rue Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Ah Prime don't look now but I addressed the Thread issue directly. Lol, the fact you missed that point though does not surprise me. Quote I come to you to hell.
PrimeNumber Posted January 4, 2015 Report Posted January 4, 2015 Ah Prime don't look now but I addressed the Thread issue directly. Lol, the fact you missed that point though does not surprise me. You still made the thread about Israel while addressing it. Which does not surprise anyone. Quote “Be like water making its way through cracks. Do not be assertive, but adjust to the object, and you shall find your way around or through it. If nothing within you stays rigid, outward things will disclose themselves. Empty your mind, be formless. Shapeless, like water. If you put water into a cup, it becomes the cup. You put water into a bottle, it becomes the bottle. You put it into a teapot, it becomes the teapot. Now, water can flow or it can crash. Be water, my friend.”― Bruce Lee
jbg Posted January 5, 2015 Author Report Posted January 5, 2015 You and you're buddy Bush have that covered without our help. BC and I don't particularly get along. That's a very strange post. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Rue Posted January 5, 2015 Report Posted January 5, 2015 (edited) You still made the thread about Israel while addressing it. Which does not surprise anyone. Your comment makes no sense. Who makes up this alleged world community when claiming its against Israel was in fact the intent of the initial thread given the examples posed as to how its used with no basis when pissing on Israel..So I never made it about Israel. It already dealt with Israel. I simply responded to it. You have a problem with this thread, don't respond to it but don't misrepresent it as if I raised the initial focus of the thread and for your information and you can check I have initiated very few threads on Israel. In fact most of my comments are in direct response to anti Israel threads or anti Israel comments initiated by others. Also stop trying to focus on me and discuss the issues or ignore them but trying to engage me in this tangent about this thread being about Israel is silly. Edited January 5, 2015 by Rue Quote I come to you to hell.
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.