Pro-Hamas Rallies in Canada

[User]

1 hour ago, impartialobserver said:

You would think that after 75 or so years... that they would figure this out. However, it appears not. It would appear that they need more creative solutions other than try to live in the same space and not fight over limited resources. I could be wrong but occupation simply prolongs things.. violence will come in time. Its not a matter of when not if. Its like having two siblings in the same room.. sometimes you have to put them in separate rooms and give them something to do other than stew/fester over the conflict. 

This conflict has almost nothing to do with limited resources. 

They hate Jews. They hate Israel. They want them to all die or go away. 

Of course violence will continue with that mentality. You don't have to be some kind of wizard with special powers to see the future to grasp this. 

It is nothing like two siblings... this is not some small fight over toys or something. This is one group fighting for their survival and another group that wants to destroy them. 

 

[impartialobserver]

6 minutes ago, User said:

This conflict has almost nothing to do with limited resources. 

They hate Jews. They hate Israel. They want them to all die or go away. 

Of course violence will continue with that mentality. You don't have to be some kind of wizard with special powers to see the future to grasp this. 

It is nothing like two siblings... this is not some small fight over toys or something. This is one group fighting for their survival and another group that wants to destroy them. 

 

smh... If the land mass was larger and not one of inherently limited resources.. a whole lot of solutions could be brought forth. But it is not. Unlike you, I have no dog in the fight and therefore no one to defend. Your passions preclude you from seeing anything other than simple good vs. evil. 

 

You should read Cities of Salt... then you would have a greater understanding of the ME and not just that they are evil. 

Edited Wednesday at 07:16 PM by impartialobserver

[User]

4 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

smh... If the land mass was larger and not one of inherently limited resources.. a whole lot of solutions could be brought forth. But it is not. Unlike you, I have no dog in the fight and therefore no one to defend. Your passions preclude you from seeing anything other than simple good vs. evil. 

You don't know anything about my passions and you are just dismissing my comments instead of dealing with their validity while pretending like you hold some objective moral high ground... you don't.

[impartialobserver]

4 minutes ago, User said:

You don't know anything about my passions and you are just dismissing my comments instead of dealing with their validity while pretending like you hold some objective moral high ground... you don't.

Objective.. yes. Moral...this is where you show your passion because I never mentioned being more or less moral than anyone else. When I read about this story and the ME in general... I do not care who is right, wrong, the victim, the oppressor. Clear enough? I only ponder why it keeps going on in perpetuity. Why that area has such violence.. not just Israel but Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, etc. I can tell you that it comes down to more than just one religion hating the other. It has many layers. 

Edited Wednesday at 07:22 PM by impartialobserver

[User]

1 minute ago, impartialobserver said:

Objective.. yes. Moral...this is where you show your passion because I never mentioned being more or less moral than anyone else. When I read about this story and the ME in general... I do not care who is right, wrong, the victim, the oppressor. Clear enough? I only ponder why it keeps going on in perpetuity. Why that area has such violence.. not just Israel but Lebanon, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, etc. I can tell you that it comes down to more than just one religion hating the other. It has many layers. 

No, you don't. What you say has validity or it doesn't. You are engaged in fallacious reasoning just dismissing what people say as if you are the objective one and they are not. 

Moral high ground is just a common saying, you are just reading more into what I said than I did to try to make a point that doesn't exist. 

You can't ever know why if you don't care who is right or wrong, as those are all components of the why. 

 

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, User said:

No, you don't. What you say has validity or it doesn't. You are engaged in fallacious reasoning just dismissing what people say as if you are the objective one and they are not. 

Moral high ground is just a common saying, you are just reading more into what I said than I did to try to make a point that doesn't exist. 

You can't ever know why if you don't care who is right or wrong, as those are all components of the why. 

 

Au contraire.. I can tell you why it is dry in Nevada but not care if it is or not. 
 

Your lack of objectivity is too easily spotted. Its fine.. you deeply care about the Israelis. I do not. My only curiosity is why this conflict keeps going and going as well as the others in the ME. 

[Legato]

7 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

My only curiosity is why this conflict keeps going and going as well as the others in the ME. 

Religion, mainly.

[User]

13 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Au contraire.. I can tell you why it is dry in Nevada but not care if it is or not. 

Can you tell me why someone would intervene in a rape without even bothering to understand the motivations behind it?

Not every situation, nor is the one in Israel, a purely simple observation of something happening in nature like why it is dry in Nevada. 
 

14 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Your lack of objectivity is too easily spotted. Its fine.. you deeply care about the Israelis. I do not. My only curiosity is why this conflict keeps going and going as well as the others in the ME. 

What lack of objectivity? You simply assert this as if that makes it true. 

If you care about why this keeps going, you need to understand the motivations behind why it keeps going. 

What you are doing is sitting there like, golly gee wiz, why does that guy getting kicked keep fighting back? Hmmm... if only I the amazingly objective person here could possibly ponder why... because I don't care if it is right or wrong to kick someone or not or if it is right or wrong to fight back or not... I guess I will just ponder on this mystery of the universe forever. 

[impartialobserver]

1 minute ago, User said:

Can you tell me why someone would intervene in a rape without even bothering to understand the motivations behind it?

Not every situation, nor is the one in Israel, a purely simple observation of something happening in nature like why it is dry in Nevada. 
 

What lack of objectivity? You simply assert this as if that makes it true. 

If you care about why this keeps going, you need to understand the motivations behind why it keeps going. 

What you are doing is sitting there like, golly gee wiz, why does that guy getting kicked keep fighting back? Hmmm... if only I the amazingly objective person here could possibly ponder why... because I don't care if it is right or wrong to kick someone or not or if it is right or wrong to fight back or not... I guess I will just ponder on this mystery of the universe forever. 

Not going to play your disingenuous game. Been around the block a few too many times to take the bait

Your lack of objectivity is easily spotted.. your first question is evidence. Quite the terrible poker player. 

First, the conflict predates me as I was born in 1977. Second, it affects me directly in no way. Third, I have no control over the outcome. My being outraged for either side changes absolutely nothing. It appears that your outrage is also quite ineffective. It still keeps happening even though your post time after time. So what I am getting out of this pointless discussion is that you can't fathom that I am not emotionally invested. Well.. I am not so either get over it and move on or continue talking to yourself. 

my curiosity is simple.. why it keeps going and going? Answer.. it is multifaceted. 

[Venandi]

21 minutes ago, Legato said:

Religion, mainly.

That's the problem with Hamas.

Take religious ideology out of the equation, replace it with political objectives and negotiations become a possibility.

Trying to negotiate with Hamas is like trying to take the temperature in Nevada without a thermometer. 

Worth watching:

 

Edited Wednesday at 07:59 PM by Venandi

[User]

43 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

Not going to play your disingenuous game. Been around the block a few too many times to take the bait

Your lack of objectivity is easily spotted.. your first question is evidence. Quite the terrible poker player. 

The only person playing games here is you Mr you are the only objective one *cough* yeah right. 
After I pick apart your reasoning and expect you to defend your baseless assertions about me... you run away. 

LOL

[impartialobserver]

4 minutes ago, User said:

The only person playing games here is you Mr you are the only objective one *cough* yeah right. 
After I pick apart your reasoning and expect you to defend your baseless assertions about me... you run away. 

LOL

Run away... still here. Between the two of us.. I am easily the more objective one. Your first question comes from the subjective point of view... I know that you can't see that. You expect me to be as emotionally invested as you... that is subjective. 

[eyeball]

3 hours ago, User said:

There was no subjugation on day one. Palestinians had their own land at the time. 

There was no subjugation. What are you even talking about?

Try highlighting the word subjugation and clicking on define. Here's what I get. What does your phone/tablet/computer say?

Dictionary

Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more

noun

the action of bringing someone or something under domination or control.

"the colonial subjugation of a country by means of brute military force"

[I am Groot]

On 6/23/2024 at 6:53 PM, eyeball said:

Not much, certainly not in a discussion with you people about the ME.  And the reason I say that is because when First Nation's land claims are the topic you people suddenly roll your eyes, palm your faces, laugh your asses off and prattle away about ancient history and getting over it.

You can't make this stuff up.

 

When you're not in charge of your own destiny you take what the big boys give you.

The natives got pushed aside by a stronger nation, which is the story of the world throughout history going back to before written history began. They're now vastly outnumbered by those people who, unlike the indigenous tribes, did not exterminate those who were on the lands we took. There is no remedy for this other than to 'get over it'. They benefit from living in one of the world's few great, wealthy nations, far better off than their ancestors.

The Palestinians were never a nation and after the Ottomans got beat the world divided the territory between them and the Jews. Tough noogies if they didn't like it. Those who stuck it out are leading better lives with more freedom than any of their Arab brethren in the surrounding countries. As for the rest... when a weak people make themselves annoyances to everyone else they're unlikely to be treated well or to prosper. Frankly, they don't deserve their own nation. The West Bank should go back to Jordan and trade the Jews on it for the Arabs in Gaza. 

Of course, Jordan no longer wants them, so they'd have to be bribed with a very big bundle of cash and incentives.

[eyeball]

2 hours ago, impartialobserver said:

You would think that after 75 or so years... that they would figure this out. However, it appears not. It would appear that they need more creative solutions other than try to live in the same space and not fight over limited resources. I could be wrong but occupation simply prolongs things.. violence will come in time. Its not a matter of when not if. Its like having two siblings in the same room.. sometimes you have to put them in separate rooms and give them something to do other than stew/fester over the conflict. 

As I've pointed out numerous times, thousands of Israelis and Palestinians have been living, loving, working and solving their difficulties the same way ordinary people elsewhere in the world do. You need to keep these people together in the same room but the forever warriors will probably need to be separated - by peacekeepers from the nations that helped create this conflict.

Tall order for sure and it'll probably take a couple of generations - which is nothing compared to forever but someone will eventually figure it out. I'm sure it'll be much to the dismay of people from both sides who'd rather subscribe to foreverness. I bet neither will accept it without a fight.

[User]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

Try highlighting the word subjugation and clicking on define. Here's what I get. What does your phone/tablet/computer say?

Dictionary

Definitions from Oxford Languages · Learn more

noun

the action of bringing someone or something under domination or control.

"the colonial subjugation of a country by means of brute military force"

Try googling this history of Israel, they were not subjugating Palestinians on day one... they each had their own land... 

It was Palestinians who waged war against them on day one.

1 hour ago, impartialobserver said:

Run away... still here. Between the two of us.. I am easily the more objective one. Your first question comes from the subjective point of view... I know that you can't see that. You expect me to be as emotionally invested as you... that is subjective. 

No, not really. You are clearly emotionally invested in your subjective views of the posters, as you were here to me, instead of objectively evaluating my arguments. 

[impartialobserver]

13 minutes ago, User said:

Try googling this history of Israel, they were not subjugating Palestinians on day one... they each had their own land... 

It was Palestinians who waged war against them on day one.

No, not really. You are clearly emotionally invested in your subjective views of the posters, as you were here to me, instead of objectively evaluating my arguments. 

You are easily confused. I am objectively posting about the topic, Israel vs. Hamas. You... on the other hand, are not objective. Your views on this topic are quite subjective. I can tell that it bothers you that I am not emotionally invested in the topic of Israel vs. Hamas. 

Edited Wednesday at 10:09 PM by impartialobserver

[eyeball]

39 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

When you're not in charge of your own destiny you take what the big boys give you.

Sure if you're unwilling to put any effort into resisting. OTOH you have little choice but to acknowledge the consequences if someone resists your imposition.

43 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

The natives got pushed aside by a stronger nation, which is the story of the world throughout history going back to before written history began.

Except we're talking about events that happened within living memory.

44 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

The Palestinians were never a nation and after the Ottomans got beat the world divided the territory between them and the Jews. Tough noogies if they didn't like it

How do you like the noogies that come with them not liking it?

45 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

Those who stuck it out are leading better lives with more freedom than any of their Arab brethren in the surrounding countries.

Sounds like a good argument for a one state solution.

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

As for the rest... when a weak people make themselves annoyances to everyone else they're unlikely to be treated well or to prosper. Frankly, they don't deserve their own nation.

Maybe Canada should have advised Jewish settlers to treat Palestinians more like the Beothuk were treated in Newfoundland. That sure would have saved everyone today a lot of problems and consigned the whole thing to the ancient history bin.  Is it too late you think?

1 hour ago, I am Groot said:

Of course, Jordan no longer wants them, so they'd have to be bribed with a very big bundle of cash and incentives.

The time and place to discuss something like would be during the reconciliation phase of a grand slam ME peace treaty that will have to be negotiated at some point in the future. Preferably before someone else in the region gets their hands on a nuke - which probably won't be long.

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, User said:

Try googling this history of Israel, they were not subjugating Palestinians on day one... they each had their own land... 

It was Palestinians who waged war against them on day one.

Irgun, Lehi, Haganah and Palmach were Jewish Zionist terrorist/paramilitary groups that violently attacked anyone who resisted their conquest, occupation and colonization of Palestine starting in the 20's - including Jews who'd lived there long before that. It's patently clear that Palestinians did not start the conflict in the region that is still violently unfolding to this day.

Edited Wednesday at 11:05 PM by eyeball

[User]

59 minutes ago, impartialobserver said:

You are easily confused. I am objectively posting about the topic, Israel vs. Hamas. You... on the other hand, are not objective. Your views on this topic are quite subjective. I can tell that it bothers you that I am not emotionally invested in the topic of Israel vs. Hamas. 

Here you are again, pushing your subjective emotional views of me.

This isn’t objective nor is it focused on Israel or Hamas.

You do this to avoid any real debate or criticism of your so-called “objective” posts.

 

[impartialobserver]

23 minutes ago, User said:

Here you are again, pushing your subjective emotional views of me.

This isn’t objective nor is it focused on Israel or Hamas.

You do this to avoid any real debate or criticism of your so-called “objective” posts.

 

so easily confused, you are.... My post that started this thoroughly pointless discussion was purely objective.. meaning, I have no personal interest in the outcome.  If the post that started this was not about israel or hamas.. you need some better reading glasses or lay off the bottle. CdnFox was able to discern that it was about Israel or Hamas but you were not.. Hmm... Your responses to me are purely subjective... full of assumptions about how I need to care about the outcome. 

"You would think that after 75 or so years... that they would figure this out. However, it appears not. It would appear that they need more creative solutions other than try to live in the same space and not fight over limited resources. I could be wrong but occupation simply prolongs things.. violence will come in time. Its not a matter of when not if. Its like having two siblings in the same room.. sometimes you have to put them in separate rooms and give them something to do other than stew/fester over the conflict. "
 

[User]

1 hour ago, impartialobserver said:

so easily confused, you are....

Still making subjective comments about me instead of being "objective" on the subject you claim to be "objective" on here. 

 

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Irgun, Lehi, Haganah and Palmach were Jewish Zionist terrorist/paramilitary groups that violently attacked anyone who resisted their conquest, occupation and colonization of Palestine starting in the 20's - including Jews who'd lived there long before that. It's patently clear that Palestinians did not start the conflict in the region that is still violently unfolding to this day.

This has nothing to do with your claim about Israel's subjugation... Israel did not even exist at this point. You are just grasping at straws and throwing mud at the wall because the facts are that Israel coming into existence did not subjugate the Palestinians. 

 

[eyeball]

1 hour ago, User said:

This has nothing to do with your claim about Israel's subjugation...Israel did not even exist at this point. 

I was speaking to your claim about who started it by pointing out it wasn't Palestinians.

1 hour ago, User said:

You are just grasping at straws and throwing mud at the wall because the facts are that Israel coming into existence did not subjugate the Palestinians. 

Well then you simply don't understand the meaning of the term. In the meantime;

Palestinians have a recognized right under international law to resist Israeli occupation under Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions. This right is affirmed in the context of the right of self-determination of all peoples under foreign and colonial rule.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_right_to_resist#:~:text=Palestinians have a recognized right,under foreign and colonial rule.

 

[User]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

I was speaking to your claim about who started it by pointing out it wasn't Palestinians.

Then when did this alleged subjugation begin you claim happened?

And yes... when it comes to Israel... the Palestinians were the ones who started it.

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

Well then you simply don't understand the meaning of the term. In the meantime;

There was no occupation when Israel was founded and the Palestinians went to war against them. 

[eyeball]

11 minutes ago, User said:

Then when did this alleged subjugation begin you claim happened?

When Israel was created.

12 minutes ago, User said:

And yes... when it comes to Israel... the Palestinians were the ones who started it.

No, Palestinians most certainly did not create Israel.

13 minutes ago, User said:

There was no occupation when Israel was founded and the Palestinians went to war against them. 

Responsibility for the occupation of Palestine was transferred to Israel from Britain.

Palestine went to war against subjugation, this time by Israel. Before that it was the British and before that the Ottomans and well, you know the drill.

And like I said Zionists even killed Jews that got in Israel's way. How do you explain that?