Printable View
im not an apologist for israel. i criticize israel on many things. just not the things which we discuss here. if we got into a discussion on israeli politics..... then id be on tribesmans side, at least i think.
but yes, this is the verdun of backroom.
Don:
1. I enjoy hearing the opposing perspective, especially when supported by evidence and/or good logic. Nothing tests and refines my own sense of the world as fully as learning from the other perspective. Pushing my own case encourages the pushback that generates this knowledge.
2. Sometimes it is cathartic to throw out my viewpoint, even when I know it will be disagreed with by a majority of those reading. Just the act of stating my own views provides a sense of satisfaction.
3. Every so often I strike a chord with someone on some subject and I know I have added a little something to their own knowledge of things -- satisfies the "teacher" in me.
Warning: if this sub-theme develops long enough I'll have to give it its own thread.
I was laughing all the way through that post don, good stuff...
anyway onto your points...
I usually get tired of the israeli topics after a while, we usually end up going over similar stuff everytime.... god knows how many times the discussion of israel's founding has come up, then we usually get onto population figures before and after israel was founded, if i haven't been involved in one for a while or there some recent news on the issue to get me 'worked up' i will have the energy to take part, but i get fatigued after a while, i think it was after about 30 pages on the last one i finally gave up...
I suppose i remain convinced that people can be convinced by logic, or specifically my logic, and i suppose most other people are like this as well, either that or on the other side of the coin they simply can't believe a person has logically choosen thier position and wants to show them the error in thier ways... theres probably a little anger venting in there as well... i know i usually feel better after calling the israel goverment terrorists...
I would make one small point though... the palestinian side usually runs along the lines off thier both as bad as each other, whilst the israeli side runs along the lines off they are better than the palestinians...(or the palestinian goverment/hamas/fatah)
I'm really curious regardless of your stance, whether you have any marginal hope or belief that you might actually influence anyone's views on this issue, and if so, what supports you in that delusion?
I suppose i never think i will change hoohah guys views, but maybe some of the more nuetral minded people or perhaps just those curious and browsing, though i guess you hope you can prove a few facts show that the other is wrong in a few things and with the person's new awareness of the facts they can make a better informed decision...
Edit: probably a good idea seperating this into a different topic seamus...
Agreed, and posts moved to this thread. You accidently get a +1, but your a decent sort when you're not mafia, so....
I should make note, I myself have been pretty passionate over the years as a usual defender of Israel, however I can see where they've been wrong on some issues, and I can attest to those. I just don't want anybody thinking that I'm claiming to be an unbiased mediator.Quote:
I'm curious folks, and I'm taking an informal poll, tangentially related to the thread topic. We have a 'usual suspects' list of those who play apologist for the IDF versus those who play apologist for Hamas. While the degree of defense (and denial) varies among members on each side, at the end of the day, I believe the lines are pretty set.
Normally in politics, 1/3 argues with the other 1/3 for mindshare of the undecided 1/3 in the middle. On this particular issue, there is no middle, and it's rare, if not strictly hypothetical, for somebody's views to shift on this issue.
I know Idaho and Tribesman are always going to agree with the Palestinians. And I know CR & Hooahguy are going to come down on the side of the Israelis. There's never going to be any deviation from that predetermined result.
So, like Sisyphus with his rock, we roll this debate out about once a month. I'm as guilty as anyone. But I find myself asking, myself and all of you, why do we continue to debate this? Do any of us really honestly believe we're not in the Verdun of backroom conversations? Do any of you have any hope of climbing out of the trench and advancing, or of evolving your own line of thought, for that matter?
I'm serious about this... I'm really curious regardless of your stance, whether you have any marginal hope or belief that you might actually influence anyone's views on this issue, and if so, what supports you in that delusion?
i have no hope that tribesman, idaho, or bopa will change their views.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
but i do, as Seamus Fermanagh said, take satisfaction in telling the word what i think.
let me be clear about something. i am both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian. i want a Palestinian country to live peacefully side-by-side with Israel. i do not want the destruction of the Palestinian people. i want them to live and prosper, but live peacefully. that, by my definition, as well as people like Alan Dershowitz, and im sure many others, that is the definition of being pro-Palestinian.
if you support Palestinians in taking violence against israel, you are not working for the betterment of the Palestinians.
was laughing all the way through that post don, good stuff...
anyway onto your points...
I usually get tired of the israeli topics after a while, we usually end up going over similar stuff everytime.... god knows how many times the discussion of israel's founding has come up, then we usually get onto population figures before and after israel was founded, if i haven't been involved in one for a while or there some recent news on the issue to get me 'worked up' i will have the energy to take part, but i get fatigued after a while, i think it was after about 30 pages on the last one i finally gave up...
I suppose i remain convinced that people can be convinced by logic, or specifically my logic, and i suppose most other people are like this as well, either that or on the other side of the coin they simply can't believe a person has logically choosen thier position and wants to show them the error in thier ways... theres probably a little anger venting in there as well... i know i usually feel better after calling the israel goverment terrorists...
I would make one small point though... the palestinian side usually runs along the lines off thier both as bad as each other, whilst the israeli side runs along the lines off they are better than the palestinians...(or the palestinian goverment/hamas/fatah)
I'm really curious regardless of your stance, whether you have any marginal hope or belief that you might actually influence anyone's views on this issue, and if so, what supports you in that delusion?
I suppose i never think i will change hoohah guys views, but maybe some of the more nuetral minded people or perhaps just those curious and browsing, though i guess you hope you can prove a few facts show that the other is wrong in a few things and with the person's new awareness of the facts they can make a better informed decision...
Edit: did i hear something about a poll....?
Where's the option for "I support the civilians, may the war-hungry idiots burn"?
I support a secular one-state solution. So I guess I support both sides. Just neither of those in charge.
My viewpoint is not in the poll.
I think both sides are in the wrong.
:shrug:
EDIT: HoreTore was faster... I'm getting old and rusty :shame:
HoreTore, do you really think a one-state solution, with a Palestinian majority, would allow for Jewish residents? A bit off topic for this particular thread, but by saying one-secular state, you're saying Palestine only, no more Jews, whether you intend to or not.
Andres, I think you fall under Gah. Sorry. :shrug:
someone else mentioned it in the other thread, an idea to stop the majority lording over the minority.... you could use a few methods, one would be to require something like 75% to pass legislation, it would stop any bad laws getting passed and mean coalition goverment and compromise is the only way to govern.... maybe we should have this discussion back over in the other topic ?
:laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:Quote:
not very surprising that most neo-nazi's vote for the SP
Fragony you really are out of the loop since your old "lets beat up immigrants" days , why not visit some of those nice dutch neo-nazi websites and see how happy the scum there are that the Israelis are confronting the muslim menace .
You will see Frag that they have the same "muslims gonna getya" line of errrrrrr......"thought" that you exhibit .
Its not that I agree with the Palestinians Don , its just that those who are most vocal in support of Israel are usually the ones with gaping great holes in their arguements which are easier to rip apart .Quote:
I know Idaho and Tribesman are always going to agree with the Palestinians.
How about a (con)federal state, with protection of minority rights written in the constitution? And certain mechanisms when deciding to change certain issues (listed in the constitution, e.g. said minority rights), like a qualified majority (for example 1/2 +1 in each "group" and 2/3 in the whole parliament)?Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
:inquisitive:Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
I feel... excluded.
:bigcry:
PAH! A proper police should help iron out the idiots on both sides, ie. the settlers and Hamas. You don't see many attacks from the arabs living inside Israel, do you? Why are they capable of living in peace, but those who have lived with bombings all their life are not? If anything, it should be the other way around. I'm more than confident that there are enough moderates on both sides to make a state. There would be some tension with the idiots, but I can't see it being more than there already is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
And I'm sorry, if you can't make a state including the original inhabitants(the palestinians), then you can't make a state. Pure and simple.
I really can't bring myself to support either side. I don't think moving arguments would be enough to change that; it'll require an improvement in the maturity and compassion of the leadership of one or both groups.
Ajax
This is kind of off-topic, as Little Grizzly politely hinted, but I'm sorry, I can't resist. There are no protections you could put into the Consitution that the Palestinians wouldn't override on day 3. If they didn't have the votes, enough Jordanians, Syrians Lebanese, et. al. would enter the new secular state, register to vote, and swell the ranks until they had the votes, assuming folks like Hamas would waste their time with following Constitutions in the first place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
Any one-state solution means death/displacement to all Jews in Israel. Period.
I voted with israel but this statement sums me up perfectly too:
Quote:
let me be clear about something. i am both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian. i want a Palestinian country to live peacefully side-by-side with Israel. i do not want the destruction of the Palestinian people. i want them to live and prosper, but live peacefully.
Well, if a majority in each group and 2/3d in the entire parliament (cumulative conditions) is needed, then it doesn't matter how large the arab group is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
It works for Belgium :shrug:
GAH!!! which palestinians do you expect me to support. I support those getting shelled by the isrealis, those crushed to death by falling buildings or horribly burning because there was a member of hamas in their building. but i don't support the men who fire rockets into isreali towns. i support those who lost their homes, their ancestral lands to the jews. but i do not support those that will kill children to reclaim them.
and who among the isrealis am i to support? i would gladly support those who want a peaceful resolution. those who advocate talks, and those small few harmed by hamas. but i cannot condone the generals who want to drop tons of explosives. those who attack schools, blow up homes. kill indescriminatly and destroy thousands of pounds of food meant to feed the impovershed.
I support a strong, autonomous, healthy and prosperous Palestine. I just believe it has to be along side, living in peaceful harmony with Israel. . I have nothing against the Palestinians, and I do not begrudge them their own prosperous, soevereign state. But I am coming to believe that is not what they want for themselves.
Why do you only mention the palestinian crazies as the people who would break such a constitution? Do you really think the jewish settlers would somehow magically stop their arab-killing ways?Quote:
Originally Posted by Don Corleone
In order for such a state to come about, there would undoubtedly be tensions. But I really can't see how there would be more than there already is. The IDF would still be as strong, and it should be quite capable of protecting both sides.
Maybe give them a modicum of self-government, call them the Palestinian Nation, and set up a Bureau of Palestinian Affairs to manage relationships with them? Then you could relocate them to reservations in the Negev desert so you could use any quality land they happen to have.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Ajax
Uhm..... That would be the current situation....Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
Any solution to the problem in the middle-east would have to allow the palestinians the right to return to their land, the land stolen from them. Nothing else will last.
I'm just saying, some of us may have put states together in the past without including the original inhabitants.Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
Ajax
Yes, but you massacred 95% of them. So I guess another option is to massacre 95% of either the jews or arabs.... But then again, this is the 18th century anymore, killing millions to keep order is kinda frowned upon....Quote:
Originally Posted by ajaxfetish
hmmm, sounds like................ belgium, but with suicide bombings and white phosherous too. no thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Andres
[edit]
more seriously:
there is no common polity therefore there can be no true nation of citizens.
as i said in another thread:
[/edit]Quote:
My point is that a representative polity functions precisely because the individual delegates responsibility to a political class to act in their name. The individual must therefore take responsibility for the actions committed in his name, and does so in sound conscience because the community have a sufficient pool shared values that decisions made are likely to reflect the will of the individual.
I don't believe any other topic fits the Gah! option better. :gah2: ftw.
Right on the mark! :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
But in terms of interest, getting increasingly apathetic. My life is too short to get an ulcer over this segment of desert.
~:smoking:
I support mass geoncide
wait- how come im the one who "started" this thread? i didnt. don did.
just letting everyone know....
Where's the option for they're both as bad as each other and quite frankly im sick of hearing about them continuously blow each other up?
~;)