View Full Version : Palestinian in-fighting murders three children
Banquo's Ghost
12-11-2006, 11:54
I am a long-term supporter of the creation of a Palestinian state, but they are going to need to grow up a very great deal before they prove themselves worthy of such.
This incident (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6167835.stm) cannot be explained away by referring to the brutalisation of an occupied people. This one is entirely of their own making, and reflects a callous barbarism that is only too evident in the Middle East.
Three children shot dead in Gaza
Gunmen in Gaza City have shot dead the three sons of an intelligence chief linked to the Palestinian party Fatah.
One adult was also killed in the attack which took place in a street crowded with children on their way to school.
The boys' father was named as Baha Balousheh, who led a crackdown on the now-ruling Hamas movement 10 years ago.
The BBC's Alan Johnston in Gaza says the motive is unclear but Mr Balousheh's position means he would have made many enemies.
Tensions between Fatah and the Hamas government have frequently led to gun battles in the streets of Gaza that have killed dozens of people.
The attack came a day after gunmen shot at Interior Minister Saeed Seyam's convoy in Gaza. Mr Seyam, who is a senior Hamas leader, was unharmed in that incident.
The attack happened as children were arriving at nine schools which line Palestine Street in Gaza City's central Rimal district.
The gunmen fired more than 70 bullets at the vehicle in which Mr Balousheh's children, aged between six and 10, were travelling. At least two other children were hurt.
Inside the white vehicle with its blacked out passenger windows, the seats and a school bag were covered in blood.
There were scenes of pandemonium as hundreds of children and parents ran for cover from the gunfire.
Fatah supporters gathered in the streets vowing revenge for the attack.
Fadwa Nabulsi, a 12-year-old interviewed by the Associated Press, said she was outside a school with her nine-year-old brother, Wael, when the shooting started.
"We saw fire coming from one car. We started screaming and children started running.
"I was crying, and I lost Wael for about half an hour. Then I found him hiding in a falafel shop. I'm trying to find my father to take us back home," she said.
Palestinian police in the area have been trying to help children locate their parents and Gaza City's Shifa hospital has been flooded with inquiries from concerned families.
Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum condemned Monday's attack as an "awful, ugly crime against innocent children".
He blamed elements who wanted to undermine Palestinian interests by creating chaos and confusion.
Hamas won a landslide victory in elections in January but its funding has been choked off by Western donors because it refuses to renounce violence and recognise Israel.
Fatah leader and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has been considering a request by his allies to hold early elections to resolve an impasse in efforts to form a unity government.
Hamas denounced the proposal to hold another election as a "coup against democracy".
For pity's sake, stop it. :shame:
We will see more of this once they get a state, and this is why I fully support it's founding. One less stick to hit us.
Sad, yeah.
Common middle eastern behavior?
Sometimes I get the feeling that they just can't help it, that the need to kill is too strong.
Of course I would never think that out loud.
Banquo's Ghost
12-11-2006, 13:10
Of course I would never think that out loud.
I'm so glad. :rolleyes:
I would suggest it may have rather more to do with the political structures prevalent in that part of the world, which were largely imposed upon them and then made worse by superpower influences.
Much of the rest of the world that has been subject to imperialism and then superpower realpolitik has suffered/is suffering in the same way.
This does not excuse the responsibility borne by the factions who do this, but it is not inherent, nor exclusive to, the Middle East.
They sure know how to play them then, must be pressing the right buttons.
Seamus Fermanagh
12-11-2006, 13:41
I would suggest it may have rather more to do with the political structures prevalent in that part of the world, which were largely imposed upon them and then made worse by superpower influences.
Much of the rest of the world that has been subject to imperialism and then superpower realpolitik has suffered/is suffering in the same way.
This does not excuse the responsibility borne by the factions who do this, but it is not inherent, nor exclusive to, the Middle East.
Nor exclusive to this moment in history. In fact, looked at across a broader swath, you could make a good argument that such conflict/violence is the human norm. Far more places have been "governed" by tribalism/warlordism for far longer than any other style of government -- enough for me to suspect it is the human norm and that Western Democracy is the abberation.
Banquo's Ghost
12-11-2006, 13:59
Nor exclusive to this moment in history. In fact, looked at across a broader swath, you could make a good argument that such conflict/violence is the human norm. Far more places have been "governed" by tribalism/warlordism for far longer than any other style of government -- enough for me to suspect it is the human norm and that Western Democracy is the abberation.
You're right of course, but I would argue with your conclusion. I don't see it as an abberation, but as progression along a path.
The natural state of mankind is actually peace, because not only is that what most people wish for most of the time, but it is the only state that allows progress beyond those animal instincts. So the development of peaceful ways to resolve conflicts is a major step forward.
We are in the era where violence still has its attractions to some, but we have real working models to show what we can achieve through peace. It is imperative we strengthen and support those models in the face of violent provocation, or we will slip back.
As for those still caught in the web of violence, I am of the opinion that they need to be left alone (absolutely alone, no tinkering) to find their own way to peace. That may require many casualties and of a scale that convinces people that they must seek another way.
Eventually, every man tires of war. Just look at the bloodbaths we inflicted on ourselves in Europe to finally get the clue. The Middle East is a rose-scented garden of tranquillity compared to what we educated ourselves with.
yesdachi
12-11-2006, 15:08
This is a perfect example of why I think we should redistribute our wealth to them and all others like them…NOT!
The gunmen fired more than 70 bullets at the vehicle in which Mr Balousheh's children, aged between six and 10, were travelling.
I heard it on the radio this afternoon.
Almost made me cry.
:shame:
Pannonian
12-11-2006, 17:01
As for those still caught in the web of violence, I am of the opinion that they need to be left alone (absolutely alone, no tinkering) to find their own way to peace. That may require many casualties and of a scale that convinces people that they must seek another way.
Eventually, every man tires of war. Just look at the bloodbaths we inflicted on ourselves in Europe to finally get the clue. The Middle East is a rose-scented garden of tranquillity compared to what we educated ourselves with.
That's what I've been advocating. Just cut off the middle east from Europe and let them kill each other as much as they want, it's nothing to do with us. There's nothing there that interests us, and all sides have repeatedly told us it's none of our business. Let Palestine, Israel, Syria, whoever else thinks the EU is a busybody do without dilpomatic and economic links with the EU. And when it's hurt them enough, let them come back when they're ready to listen. The EU has miniscule political and military influence in the region, but massive economic muscle. Why don't we use it?
Seamus Fermanagh
12-11-2006, 17:44
You're right of course, but I would argue with your conclusion. I don't see it as an abberation, but as progression along a path.
The natural state of mankind is actually peace, because not only is that what most people wish for most of the time, but it is the only state that allows progress beyond those animal instincts. So the development of peaceful ways to resolve conflicts is a major step forward.
I do not believe that mankind's natural state is that of peace, though I adamantly agree that peaceful conflict resolution represents progress. I actually suspect that Hobbes had a good deal more truth behind his perspective than is currently "fashionable" in academic circles. I believe, for example, that children are a hint closer to the "state of nature" than adults -- and just look at how wonderfully they treat one another absent some external authority....
As for those still caught in the web of violence, I am of the opinion that they need to be left alone (absolutely alone, no tinkering) to find their own way to peace. That may require many casualties and of a scale that convinces people that they must seek another way.
Eventually, every man tires of war. Just look at the bloodbaths we inflicted on ourselves in Europe to finally get the clue. The Middle East is a rose-scented garden of tranquillity compared to what we educated ourselves with.
It could be true that violence will pale :inquisitive: -- I pray so :yes: -- and that this form of quarantine may be the best choice in the long run. It would require considerable resources to implement, however, for while there are fewer in the West who seek conflict there are more than enough willing to profit from it.
That's what I've been advocating. Just cut off the middle east from Europe and let them kill each other as much as they want, it's nothing to do with us. There's nothing there that interests us, and all sides have repeatedly told us it's none of our business. Let Palestine, Israel, Syria, whoever else thinks the EU is a busybody do without dilpomatic and economic links with the EU. And when it's hurt them enough, let them come back when they're ready to listen. The EU has miniscule political and military influence in the region, but massive economic muscle. Why don't we use it?
That happens to involve the killing of thousands - maybe millions of completely innocent peaople, how many inncoent children would you want to die before we let them back in?!
Pannonian
12-11-2006, 20:51
That happens to involve the killing of thousands - maybe millions of completely innocent peaople, how many inncoent children would you want to die before we let them back in?!
When they ask for our help and are willing to listen to and follow our terms. Other countries don't have any Godgiven right to expect our help, especially if they repeatedly tell us it is unwelcome and abuse us when we offer it. Let them stew for as long as they feel independent, and only restore relations when they recognise we were right.
Vladimir
12-11-2006, 21:25
According to Al-Jazeera, it's Israel's fault (http://www.worldpoliticswatch.com/article.aspx?id=395).
Who is responsible for the situation?
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the most important reasons why these crises and problems continue to simmer. The day when Israel was founded created the basis for our problems. The West should finally come to understand this. Everything would be much calmer if the Palestinians were given their rights.
Do you mean to say that if Israel did not exist, there would suddenly be democracy in Egypt, that the schools in Morocco would be better, that the public clinics in Jordan would function better?
I think so.
Can you please explain to me what the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has to do with these problems?
The Palestinian cause is central for Arab thinking.
In the end, is it a matter of feelings of self-esteem?
Exactly. It’s because we always lose to Israel. It gnaws at the people in the Middle East that such a small country as Israel, with only about 7 million inhabitants, can defeat the Arab nation with its 350 million. That hurts our collective ego. The Palestinian problem is in the genes of every Arab. The West’s problem is that it does not understand this.
When they ask for our help and are willing to listen to and follow our terms. Other countries don't have any Godgiven right to expect our help, especially if they repeatedly tell us it is unwelcome and abuse us when we offer it. Let them stew for as long as they feel independent, and only restore relations when they recognise we were right.
The people want the help, they need it. The governments don't. If you leave them it will just get worse, violence = more violence and so on, its the innocent people that suffer, not those who make us unwelcome, by leaving we admit defeat to terrorists etc.
+ on the Israel thing, ( and of course the palestinians think its israels fault, and presumably israel think its palestines and syrias fault, and syria thinks its israel and the us etc etc.) if we were to leave israel wouldnt last very long, surrounded and without any help... more loss of life :shame:
:2thumbsup:
Seamus Fermanagh
12-11-2006, 22:00
The people want the help, they need it. The governments don't. If you leave them it will just get worse, violence = more violence and so on, its the innocent people that suffer, not those who make us unwelcome, by leaving we admit defeat to terrorists etc.
Nor would Pan-man deny this basic point. The crux of his argument runs like this:
By assisting in any way, nations external to the conflict minimize the impact of conflict on the participants, attempt to stop conflict when it happens and impede the violence when and where they can -- and by so doing prevent the participants in that conflict from finally bleeding each other white long enough to truly realize that there has to be a better way. By limiting the conflict in the short term, we aid in its long-term continuation.
This is a draconian measure -- but it makes sense on one brutal level. Only when the terrorist is absolutely convinced that no "dint of effort" will actually drive all the Israelis into the sea we she/he cease. Since a majority of Israelis are already convinced that they cannot eradicate Islam, they're probably a short step or two further down this road of realization than are the Palestinians and their supporters. Europe largely abjured war as a means of conflict resolution following the conclusion of WW2. Care to count the cost of that realization?
Not sure it'd work, and I'm certain that lots would die -- but it isn't as though anything else that has been tried since 1946 has done any better.
Reenk Roink
12-11-2006, 22:09
According to Al-Jazeera, it's Israel's fault (http://www.worldpoliticswatch.com/article.aspx?id=395).
And according to Fox News and The Jerusalem Post, it's the Palestinans' fault. :shrug: What else is new...?
Nor would Pan-man deny this basic point. The crux of his argument runs like this:
By assisting in any way, nations external to the conflict minimize the impact of conflict on the participants, attempt to stop conflict when it happens and impede the violence when and where they can -- and by so doing prevent the participants in that conflict from finally bleeding each other white long enough to truly realize that there has to be a better way. By limiting the conflict in the short term, we aid in its long-term continuation.
This is a draconian measure -- but it makes sense on one brutal level. Only when the terrorist is absolutely convinced that no "dint of effort" will actually drive all the Israelis into the sea we she/he cease. Since a majority of Israelis are already convinced that they cannot eradicate Islam, they're probably a short step or two further down this road of realization than are the Palestinians and their supporters. Europe largely abjured war as a means of conflict resolution following the conclusion of WW2. Care to count the cost of that realization?
Not sure it'd work, and I'm certain that lots would die -- but it isn't as though anything else that has been tried since 1946 has done any better.
Okay, thanks for explanation (although words like crux, draconian and abjured rather test my vocabulary :beam: ) I still don't think so many deaths would be justified.... :2thumbsup:
yesdachi
12-11-2006, 22:24
According to Al-Jazeera, it's Israel's fault (http://www.worldpoliticswatch.com/article.aspx?id=395).
Who is responsible for the situation?
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the most important reasons why these crises and problems continue to simmer. The day when Israel was founded created the basis for our problems. The West should finally come to understand this. Everything would be much calmer if the Palestinians were given their rights.
Do you mean to say that if Israel did not exist, there would suddenly be democracy in Egypt, that the schools in Morocco would be better, that the public clinics in Jordan would function better?
I think so.
Can you please explain to me what the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has to do with these problems?
The Palestinian cause is central for Arab thinking.
In the end, is it a matter of feelings of self-esteem?
Exactly. It’s because we always lose to Israel. It gnaws at the people in the Middle East that such a small country as Israel, with only about 7 million inhabitants, can defeat the Arab nation with its 350 million. That hurts our collective ego. The Palestinian problem is in the genes of every Arab. The West’s problem is that it does not understand this.
This is a very telling article/interview.
This is a very telling article/interview.
Its a really interesting article, although the quote is very misleading... the guy they are interviewing comes over as very considered, - i dont see why its telling though - he explains it all quite nicely (its not really a surprise that he thinks its israels fault, just as israelis would probably claim its palestines fault.) :2thumbsup:
Vladimir
12-11-2006, 22:34
This is a very telling article/interview.
Evidently there's an editor at Fox news and one at The Jerusalem Post that hold the opposite view. :yes:
Papewaio
12-11-2006, 23:04
Europe largely abjured war as a means of conflict resolution following the conclusion of WW2. Care to count the cost of that realization?
Actually the lack of warfare was a sword of damocles hovering above their heads in the form of nuclear war. European powers were quite happy to use warfare and terrorism against anyone who didn't have nuclear weapons. A quick review of what happened after 1946 and Europe's colonialism in South East Asia, state-sponsored terrorist attacks as well as other dubious actions around the world and you can see that the only reason for lack of warfare in Europe was not some sort of raising of culture and learning not to fight but just fear of being made into radioactive sludge.
In short your own answer was correct IMDHO:
I believe, for example, that children are a hint closer to the "state of nature" than adults -- and just look at how wonderfully they treat one another absent some external authority....
Without the threat of nuclear war provided by external authority, Europeans would be going to war against each other.
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
12-11-2006, 23:12
you beat me to it Banquo
It's not Israel's fault. This is why they can't get their own state. they to dang stupid to realize that, killing each other and bombaring Israel wth missles won't help them..
yesdachi
12-11-2006, 23:20
Its a really interesting article, although the quote is very misleading... the guy they are interviewing comes over as very considered, - i dont see why its telling though - he explains it all quite nicely (its not really a surprise that he thinks its israels fault, just as israelis would probably claim its palestines fault.) :2thumbsup:
What I find telling is that it gives us a look at the opinion of a very influential leader in the Arab world. His words echo the Arab world (or the Arab world echoes his). I don’t think people understand just how much differently westerners think compared to (I’ll stereotype) them and this article allows us to view this Arab way of thinking. His interpretation of events and how he rationalizes them is IMO, telling (In an open your eyes before you are headless sort of way).
Pannonian
12-11-2006, 23:36
The people want the help, they need it. The governments don't. If you leave them it will just get worse, violence = more violence and so on, its the innocent people that suffer, not those who make us unwelcome, by leaving we admit defeat to terrorists etc.
But we're not doing any good by being there. We pay the money, but we don't get the goods. Whether this is because of the government or the people doesn't make much difference.
Also, by leaving we're not admitting defeat to terrorists, by leaving we are saying we are sick of the whole mess and don't care enough to want to stay. We did the right in thing in 1948 when we left. Why are we trying to get involved again?
+ on the Israel thing, ( and of course the palestinians think its israels fault, and presumably israel think its palestines and syrias fault, and syria thinks its israel and the us etc etc.) if we were to leave israel wouldnt last very long, surrounded and without any help... more loss of life :shame:
:2thumbsup:
Israel is militarily more powerful than all the Arab countries combined if they wish to fight on Israeli soil. Palestine and the other Arab countries don't have the capability to drive the Israelis into the sea - only Israel has the capability to expand and create a Greater Israel.
I don't care enough to deny the Israelis this chance at further conquest, and I don't care enough to deny the Palestinians their chance to bleed the Israelis. However, whatever they do, they'll find that being denied economic access to the EU is going to hurt. A lot. No amount of subsidies from the US or Muslim countries is going to make up for it. Perhaps then they'll start listening to our advice to stop fighting.
According to Al-Jazeera, it's Israel's fault (http://www.worldpoliticswatch.com/article.aspx?id=395).
Who is responsible for the situation?
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is one of the most important reasons why these crises and problems continue to simmer. The day when Israel was founded created the basis for our problems. The West should finally come to understand this. Everything would be much calmer if the Palestinians were given their rights.
Do you mean to say that if Israel did not exist, there would suddenly be democracy in Egypt, that the schools in Morocco would be better, that the public clinics in Jordan would function better?
I think so.
Can you please explain to me what the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has to do with these problems?
The Palestinian cause is central for Arab thinking.
In the end, is it a matter of feelings of self-esteem?
Exactly. It’s because we always lose to Israel. It gnaws at the people in the Middle East that such a small country as Israel, with only about 7 million inhabitants, can defeat the Arab nation with its 350 million. That hurts our collective ego. The Palestinian problem is in the genes of every Arab. The West’s problem is that it does not understand this.
So let me get this. The arabs are mad because their ego is hurt. Thats just sad, if they want to do something about it then they should build up their military power and learn to fight in a coherent force to eject the Isrealis.
Prince of the Poodles
12-12-2006, 02:25
And according to Fox News and The Jerusalem Post, it's the Palestinans' fault. :shrug: What else is new...?
Umm, it is? Or are you talking about the whole situation and not this specific incident?
Reenk Roink
12-12-2006, 02:26
The latter of course. I didn't feel the need to explicitly state it.
Another org thread where the brain cells are barely engaged and the ill-thought out cliches roll in like self-satisfied sea mist.
The gunning down of kids in a car is a brutal crime. It is a brutal crime whose cause we have yet to work out. Is it a political revenge killing, a botched assasination, a contract killing, a Mossad job, etc. We don't really know. We can make guesses.
None of these possibilities are exclusively Middle Eastern. In fact they are prevalent in the Great Satan itelf often enough. Don't you have frequent shootings and killings? Political assasinations are pretty common over the last 40 years too. Didn't you lot kill a president, his brother, and two prominent civil rights protestors?
Now as for these poor child-like apes being incapable of rational behaviour - I would remind you of the death toll in Iraq of children killed by US bombs and bullets. Not to mention the prevalance of torture, rape and murder of civillians by US soldiers there.
Don Corleone
12-12-2006, 14:04
So Reenk, one faction's hitmen kill the children of a high ranking official from the other faction, all Palestinian mind you, and you feel free to drop the blame at Israel's door? :dizzy2: Yeah, that's a well-thought out position...
Amazingly, I'm with Idaho on this. I don't think we can say anything until we know where those gunmen came from. Fatah is pretty damn sure they were Hamas agents. Hamas is putting a lot of credbility on the line with everyone of them in lockstep on a supposed lie, denying any involvement. The tone of their denials and the lack of wiggle room leaves me thinking there might be something to it.
Hizbollah doesn't like it when things quiet down over there. Perhaps them or some other 4th party? Hell, for all we know it could have been organized crime. Murdering somebody's children smacks of retaliation from a crime family, not a politically motivated killing.
Reenk Roink
12-12-2006, 16:11
So Reenk, one faction's hitmen kill the children of a high ranking official from the other faction, all Palestinian mind you, and you feel free to drop the blame at Israel's door? :dizzy2: Yeah, that's a well-thought out position...
Hey Don, I just wanted to note that I was making a remark on the media slants of both respective sides concerning the whole issue and not this incident, and that I was just making a remark, not taking a position.
In fact, the content of Vladimir's quote (I didn't bother to read the article) which I was responding to clearly seems like it is concerning the whole situation.
I made that clear in my response to Prince as well.
ELITEofWARMANGINGERYBREADMEN88
12-12-2006, 16:19
Now as for these poor child-like apes being incapable of rational behaviour - I would remind you of the death toll in Iraq of children killed by US bombs and bullets. Not to mention the prevalance of torture, rape and murder of civillians by US soldiers there.
Oh Well Idaho, that what happens when you fight a war with Inserguents,deal with it. That why I don't even post in these threads anymore. some people just don't understand crap.:no:
Reenk Roink
12-12-2006, 16:22
some people just don't understand crap.:no:
This is a very supercilious statement to make.
This is a very supercilious statement to make.
Although crude, argueably it does have some truth to it.
Goofball
12-12-2006, 18:55
I find it amusing that you began your post with this:
Another org thread where the brain cells are barely engaged and the ill-thought out cliches roll in like self-satisfied sea mist.
Then ended with this:
I would remind you of the death toll in Iraq of children killed by US bombs and bullets. Not to mention the prevalance of torture, rape and murder of civillians by US soldiers there.
Decided to fight fire with fire, did you?
Decided to fight fire with fire, did you?
:laugh4: - thats not very nice
whatever they do, they'll find that being denied economic access to the EU is going to hurt. A lot. No amount of subsidies from the US or Muslim countries is going to make up for it. Perhaps then they'll start listening to our advice to stop fighting.
thats my problem with the whole thing, it will hurt, but it will be the normal people who suffer, not the governments themselves... i also dont think it will stop fighting, it will stop any european or american deaths, but sectarian violence will surely continue.
Israel is militarily more powerful than all the Arab countries combined if they wish to fight on Israeli soil. Palestine and the other Arab countries don't have the capability to drive the Israelis into the sea - only Israel has the capability to expand and create a Greater Israel.
Debatable, i think if all the arab countries in the middle east unite against israel, it would end with israels defeat, or in either case an extremely bloody mess, with huge death tolls on boths sides and probably no complete conclusion (just more terrorists/freedom fighters to worry about.
It's not Israel's fault. This is why they can't get their own state. they to dang stupid to realize that, killing each other and bombaring Israel wth missles won't help them..
Its not israels fault, i agree, but the palestiian state existed before the israel(ian?) state, and so from a palestinian point of view you can understand why this is irritable. Unless pressed internationally israel would never let palestine have a state, and negotiations will always be one sided, so for the average palestinian its only violence that seems to have any visible effect. Its gone on so long now that both sides use violence without thought. They are not stupid. From there pov its the only action that has any effect, and the kind of action that comes from growing up in an area of such violence etc.
long post for me :2thumbsup:
Pannonian
12-12-2006, 19:42
thats my problem with the whole thing, it will hurt, but it will be the normal people who suffer, not the governments themselves... i also dont think it will stop fighting, it will stop any european or american deaths, but sectarian violence will surely continue.
So why is that our concern? We've got all manner of ideas for bringing the conflict to an end. But they don't listen to us, so why should we pain ourselves over it? Surely even Cassandra grew tired after a while.
Debatable, i think if all the arab countries in the middle east unite against israel, it would end with israels defeat, or in either case an extremely bloody mess, with huge death tolls on boths sides and probably no complete conclusion (just more terrorists/freedom fighters to worry about.
They'll run into the same problem they had before - how the heck do they get there? Egypt is friendly to Israel, and in any case their military isn't even close to Israel's in quality. Jordan is virtually an Israeli client state, they'll bark when Israel tells them to. Hezbollah were only potent recently because they fought on their own soil, behind carefully prepared defences. Once they cross the border they'll find that infantry, however numerous, aren't an effective offensive force without mobility and the rest of the modern paraphernalia to back it up. Israel can be embarrassed in war by the Arab countries. Israel cannot be defeated in war by the Arab countries.
So why is that our concern? We've got all manner of ideas for bringing the conflict to an end. But they don't listen to us, so why should we pain ourselves over it? Surely even Cassandra grew tired after a while.
The normal people might well want our help, its the leaders that don't, they need our aid to survive, any loss of life is a reason for concern...
--> i dont get the cassandra bit :2thumbsup:
Don Corleone
12-12-2006, 20:24
Pannonian, what you say makes sense in a clearly logical view, devoid of any compassion. But do you think you would be able to abide your policy after the second or third widespread famine? And if your point is we just send aid, surely you don't think the aid shipments will distribute themselves? Any aid workers sent over there will be political pawns. In order for your plan to work, the quarantine would have to be absolute, and we'd have to put ourselves in a pretty soulless place to sit back and watch the Middle East devolve into that kind of mayhem, starvation and anarchy.
It's a bloody mess, and what none of us seem to understand is that there is NO solution. Israel is a whipping boy for the Arabs. If we moved every last Israeli to Florida tomorrow and removed every last soldier from Iraq, Kuwait, Yemen, etctera, they'd still be killing each other. Then it would be our fault for NOT being involved...:dizzy2:
Pannonian
12-12-2006, 20:55
The normal people might well want our help, its the leaders that don't, they need our aid to survive, any loss of life is a reason for concern...
--> i dont get the cassandra bit :2thumbsup:
Cassandra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cassandra)
"In Greek mythology, Cassandra was a daughter of King Priam and Queen Hecuba of Troy whose beauty caused Apollo to grant her the gift of prophecy. However, when she did not return his love, Apollo placed a curse on her so that no one would ever believe her predictions."
I don't see why we should continue to whip ourselves over the issue when no-one in the region listens to us. If Cassandra were smart, she would have cleared out of Troy before the Greeks came to play.
Pannonian
12-12-2006, 21:13
Pannonian, what you say makes sense in a clearly logical view, devoid of any compassion. But do you think you would be able to abide your policy after the second or third widespread famine? And if your point is we just send aid, surely you don't think the aid shipments will distribute themselves? Any aid workers sent over there will be political pawns. In order for your plan to work, the quarantine would have to be absolute, and we'd have to put ourselves in a pretty soulless place to sit back and watch the Middle East devolve into that kind of mayhem, starvation and anarchy.
If the middle east wants anarchy, let them have anarchy. If the EU feels anarchy is not in our interest, we'll intervene to make sure stability or whatever is put in place. If it doesn't make much difference either way what happens, then we intervene at our discretion. If our interests aren't involved, and the participants don't want us poking our nose in, and whatever help we offer is spurned, why should we continue to help? Gandhi or one of the other Indian nationalists once commented, if he had to choose between the British and anarchy, he would want the British out of India.
It's a bloody mess, and what none of us seem to understand is that there is NO solution. Israel is a whipping boy for the Arabs. If we moved every last Israeli to Florida tomorrow and removed every last soldier from Iraq, Kuwait, Yemen, etctera, they'd still be killing each other. Then it would be our fault for NOT being involved...:dizzy2:
Then let them blame us however much they want. I've not seen many terrorist movements that gained support through blaming an absence of intervention. It's easy to get vocal supporters through that, less easy to get activists.
If the middle east wants anarchy, let them have anarchy. If the EU feels anarchy is not in our interest, we'll intervene to make sure stability or whatever is put in place. If it doesn't make much difference either way what happens, then we intervene at our discretion. If our interests aren't involved, and the participants don't want us poking our nose in, and whatever help we offer is spurned, why should we continue to help?
help isnt spurned, its much needed by the civilians.... the middle east doesnt want anarchy, it just doesnt know how to stop it, thats why we should help. As don commented earlier, you make it sound as if all of the people living in the middle east want violence and anarchy, they simply dont...:2thumbsup:
--> + thanks for the cassandra explanation
I find it amusing that you began your post with this:
Then ended with this:
Decided to fight fire with fire, did you?
So are you saying that my statement of facts was in some way similar to nonsense about how arabs are savages unable to live peacefully.
ajaxfetish
12-12-2006, 22:53
thats my problem with the whole thing, it will hurt, but it will be the normal people who suffer, not the governments themselves... i also dont think it will stop fighting, it will stop any european or american deaths, but sectarian violence will surely continue.
That's the central problem with western intervention in other nations in general. The standard tool we use is economic sanctions, which can hurt the general populace, but usually doesn't have much direct effect on the leaders who we want to punish (who, controlling the resources of their nation and with whatever quiet international ties they use, seem to get by in just as much luxury regardless of sanctions). I guess the idea is that we'll get the people so upset with the leadership requiring the sanctions that they'll rise up or at least be tense enough to pressure their government into caving to our demands. But it's so easy for that same government to blame the west for the sanctions, since we're the ones imposing them. Duh, we make ourselves the criminal and do nothing to undermine the very thing we're standing against, while hurting those we wish to help.
How could we go about toppling the government, though? Well, we did it in Iraq. I'm not sure the people are a whole lot better off generally than they were before. The problem with direct intervention through war is that however much people may be upset with their current government or their general living conditions, nationalism is a very strong power worldwide and they'd rather put up with those horrible native governments than succumb to foreign rule (including foreign rule through a foreign-controlled native government).
Any long-term solutions have to come from within. Our problem in the west is that we don't want other places to come up with their own solutions. We feel we already know better and we want to provide solutions for them. We may be justified in having good solutions handy, as I'd say quality of life in most western countries beats that in most of the places we try to intervene, but we have an incredible arrogance complex in thinking we have the power to change these nations at will. By intervening we only delay whatever internal solution (good or bad) may come and make ourselves a target in the process. It would not be pretty to ignore it either, though, because as pointed out many innocent people die in these struggles. Plus our own interests are closely tied to many of these areas, especially with the modern global energy situation. The whole thing is a big mess, and as Don says, there probably is no solution. Certainly there is no easy quick-fix or even simple long-term plan for recovery. What is to be done? I do not know. I can only cry at the suffering that will surely continue along the way.
Ajax
ps. And the actual killing of the children may or may not have anything to do with all that. As Idaho and Don pointed out, it's similar to much of the mob violence that still does happen in the west, and not necessarily a specifically mid-eastern phenomenon.
Goofball
12-13-2006, 01:03
So are you saying that my statement of facts was in some way similar to nonsense about how arabs are savages unable to live peacefully.
I was saying that:
ill-thought out cliches
very accurately describes:
I would remind you of the death toll in Iraq of children killed by US bombs and bullets. Not to mention the prevalance of torture, rape and murder of civillians by US soldiers there.
The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) knows, I'm no fan of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. I think it was illegal, poorly planned, and entirely without reason.
But your statement, placed as it was in a thread about Palestinians killing Palestinians, demonstrated exactly your point (that was aptly made, by the way) that threads involving the middle east tend to make posters rehash their favorite talking points with or without much thought as to their relevance to the topic at hand.
Prince of the Poodles
12-13-2006, 01:17
None of these possibilities are exclusively Middle Eastern. In fact they are prevalent in the Great Satan itelf often enough. Don't you have frequent shootings and killings? Political assasinations are pretty common over the last 40 years too. Didn't you lot kill a president, his brother, and two prominent civil rights protestors?
Now as for these poor child-like apes being incapable of rational behaviour - I would remind you of the death toll in Iraq of children killed by US bombs and bullets. Not to mention the prevalance of torture, rape and murder of civillians by US soldiers there.
Why start making accusations and cut downs about America?
I havent read one post in the thread that put the USA above these people, or even had anything to do with the US.
I absolutely hate people who knee-jerk attack the USA for no reason whatsoever. People such as that are affectionately known over here as members of the "Blame America First" club.
Its like you cannot contain the vitriol, even when it is completely beside the point.
The USA, especially in recent years, is very deserving of criticism, but not in a thread that has nothing to do with it.
Jumping in a thread about Palestine and screaming about the baby-murdering americans in Iraq is stupid, pointless, and contributes nothing but hatred.
PS. Im sure there are drive by shootings in Japan occasionally, but what does that have to do with the topic? :wall:
Seamus Fermanagh
12-13-2006, 21:06
...Jumping in a thread about Palestine and screaming about the baby-murdering americans in Iraq is stupid, pointless, and contributes nothing but hatred.
PS. Im sure there are drive by shootings in Japan occasionally, but what does that have to do with the topic? :wall:
Idaho's attack was not done on auto-pilot.
Idaho attacked the West in general, and the USA in particular, in order to make the point that we of the West are no better than anyone in the Middle East and therefore have no right to consider Western culture superior or propose/enact solutions for them. He assumed/considered that a number of the comments in the thread so far reflect an attitude of cultural superiority, that those making such posts regard Middle Easterners as "beneath" them in some sense. This is what prompted his moral "high-horse" response.
yesdachi
12-13-2006, 21:20
Idaho's attack was not done on auto-pilot.
Idaho attacked the West in general, and the USA in particular, in order to make the point that we of the West are no better than anyone in the Middle East and therefore have no right to consider Western culture superior or propose/enact solutions for them. He assumed/considered that a number of the comments in the thread so far reflect an attitude of cultural superiority, that those making such posts regard Middle Easterners as "beneath" them in some sense. This is what prompted his moral "high-horse" response.
Can you imagine, people from a culture where there is freedom of religion, free speech, equality between women and men of all races, due process, voting and apple pie thinking their culture is superior to that of the Middle East. Humph, the nerve.
The “vacation/move to/raise a family in the Middle East” brochure looks like a nightmare.
Prince of the Poodles
12-13-2006, 22:52
Idaho's attack was not done on auto-pilot.
Idaho attacked the West in general, and the USA in particular, in order to make the point that we of the West are no better than anyone in the Middle East and therefore have no right to consider Western culture superior or propose/enact solutions for them. He assumed/considered that a number of the comments in the thread so far reflect an attitude of cultural superiority, that those making such posts regard Middle Easterners as "beneath" them in some sense. This is what prompted his moral "high-horse" response.
Why the USA in particular? The thread was not started by an American. No Americans made any "USA is better" type arguments. It seems as if someone had an axe to grind.
The baby-killing bit at the end sealed it, if there was any doubt. :no:
The Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) knows, I'm no fan of the U.S. invasion of Iraq. I think it was illegal, poorly planned, and entirely without reason.
But your statement, placed as it was in a thread about Palestinians killing Palestinians, demonstrated exactly your point (that was aptly made, by the way) that threads involving the middle east tend to make posters rehash their favorite talking points with or without much thought as to their relevance to the topic at hand.
Fair enough Goofball. I was indeed blasting out the cliches to hit back at ignorance.
Can you imagine, people from a culture where there is freedom of religion, free speech, equality between women and men of all races, due process, voting and apple pie thinking their culture is superior to that of the Middle East. Humph, the nerve. e.
-->
that those making such posts regard Middle Easterners as "beneath" them in some sense. This is what prompted his moral "high-horse" response.
The culture is thought to be superior, (i think) he's saying that people are reguarding the middle easterners themselves (as people) being inferior :2thumbsup:
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.