"Palestinian" PM Making It Crystal Clear

We all know there are two sides to the argument about the Palestinian/Israel conflict..Those for..and against for various reasons.

It goes..on..and on..and on...Now there is a power struggle as well with Hamas.I can't believe the people thought great changes would come voting them in..It wouldn't surpise me if they re-elected them again...They need a man to lead there future...so it has better days...Not day in..and day out of geting no where in there struggle..or there stubborness.

It don't need to be a man...it could be a woman too...(smile).

The unwillingness of the Palestinian people to come to terms with reality reflects around the world...because they could make things ALOT better for themselves.

There stubborness shadows what started all this to begin with.

As far as Israel goes..it's hard to say anything without coming off as anti-Israel then...We question history..and in a way it's coming back to bite them in the butt..

Western..and Arab worlds look at this completely different...so different that our feelings are like night & day on the subject.

Things will never be peaceful there..and the news in the Gaza Strip next year will be pretty much like this years news.I'm surpised they don't get tired of not accomplishing anything....because people are tired of reading about failure..after failure with the Palestinian elected officials.They are isolating themselves big time.

World leaders should demand peace over there..because it's one of the most HOT SPOTS in the world as far as starting another World War..or Middle East War..

I think Israel should take a big role..and put a little more back-bone into the peace efforts as well...They have a big responsibilty to the world in my opinion...Why?...because they have the ability to drag us in as deep as they get...in any conflict they have..and yet to have.

I just hope both sides can give peace a chance...but to me peace over there is a myth...a pipe dream.

This is a topic that could ...just go on forever on opinions...:)
 
Why not read some political philosophy instead of attempts at condescension on topics you don't actually grasp? Platitudes and 'deep questions' do not make effective arguments.

please attack the argument, not the arguer. I was not condescending, sorry if it came out that way. I just disagree with you on the definition of governments and what I think they should be.
 
This is really a stupid question, IMHO.

As pointed out previously, a terrorist is someone who intentionally targets innocents. Not a difficult concept; not requiring much in the way of clairvoyance. How do you fight them? You hunt them down and kill them.

Great. Hunt down and kill the governments of Russia, US, Britain, China, Turkey, Israel and Pakistan (for starters). How do you hunt down and kill your own government though? (assuming you live in one of these nations)
 
Great. Hunt down and kill the governments of Russia, US, Britain, China, Turkey, Israel and Pakistan (for starters). How do you hunt down and kill your own government though? (assuming you live in one of these nations)
The governments of Russia, US, Britain, China, Turkey, Israel and Pakistan intentionally target innocents?

Fes up. Do you really thing the islamo-fascists are innocents?
 
The governments of Russia, US, Britain, China, Turkey, Israel and Pakistan intentionally target innocents?

Fes up. Do you really thing the islamo-fascists are innocents?

Let's see. Dropping munitions on a crowded urban centre (even if in Israel's case they dropped leaflets saying - pack up your entire life and leave this area on roads that have been destroyed) is killing innocents. So US, Israel, check. China kills its own citizens (not to meddle in their affairs) and Britain I will ump in with its big bro, who's left? Turkey and Pakistan, where do I start?
As for Turkey, talk to a KURD OR AN Armenian (don't do this in Turkey!) and for Pakistan, well their human rights record is usually impeccable, I'll say firing missiles into a school counts as killing innocents. On purpose.

And no, I don't think an islamo-fascist is innocent, of course I don't exactly know what that means. But it sure sounds scary. Fascism is creeping up in N. America a bit - not the islamo kind though, so no worries.
 
Let's see. Dropping munitions on a crowded urban centre (even if in Israel's case they dropped leaflets saying - pack up your entire life and leave this area on roads that have been destroyed) is killing innocents. So US, Israel, check. China kills its own citizens (not to meddle in their affairs) and Britain I will ump in with its big bro, who's left? Turkey and Pakistan, where do I start?
As for Turkey, talk to a KURD OR AN Armenian (don't do this in Turkey!) and for Pakistan, well their human rights record is usually impeccable, I'll say firing missiles into a school counts as killing innocents. On purpose.

And no, I don't think an islamo-fascist is innocent, of course I don't exactly know what that means. But it sure sounds scary. Fascism is creeping up in N. America a bit - not the islamo kind though, so no worries.

Perhaps you could be more specific in your accusation against the US.
 
Perhaps you could be more specific in your accusation against the US.

May I include other wars than the current Iraqi situation?
And military ventures, not called wars, but 'actions' and 'defense' of other nations?

Why did the security counsel order the US to pay 17 billion to Nicaraugua?
Dropping bombs on Laos, Hiroshima, Nagasaki (unless those were military bases), Baghdad, Beirut (the CIA car bomb outside the mosque in 1985)...

I gott alook up more, but pick a decade.
 
May I include other wars than the current Iraqi situation?
And military ventures, not called wars, but 'actions' and 'defense' of other nations?

Why did the security counsel order the US to pay 17 billion to Nicaraugua?
Dropping bombs on Laos, Hiroshima, Nagasaki (unless those were military bases), Baghdad, Beirut (the CIA car bomb outside the mosque in 1985)...

I gott alook up more, but pick a decade.

WW2 Japan is not comparable to the current situation. Lets pick the current decade, or at least this and the last one.
 
WW2 Japan is not comparable to the current situation. Lets pick the current decade, or at least this and the last one.

I owe you some links, or references I believe... for the moment I'll use my usual sources - CNN, BBC, CBC, AP, Reuters, etc...

Dropping bombs on a city (packed with civilians) is an example. Firing missiles into the hotel housing journalists is another.

If I can't see you inside your home, but I toss a grenade into your window... I am responsible for killing you intentionally even if I couldn't exactly 'see' you enough to target you... Blowing up a home of suspected insurgents equals the same - 'we don't really know who is in there, but we have no proof they are NOT insurgents' so bombs away!.
 
I owe you some links, or references I believe... for the moment I'll use my usual sources - CNN, BBC, CBC, AP, Reuters, etc...

Dropping bombs on a city (packed with civilians) is an example. Firing missiles into the hotel housing journalists is another.

If I can't see you inside your home, but I toss a grenade into your window... I am responsible for killing you intentionally even if I couldn't exactly 'see' you enough to target you... Blowing up a home of suspected insurgents equals the same - 'we don't really know who is in there, but we have no proof they are NOT insurgents' so bombs away!.

As I alluded to earlier, there were a lot of terrible things that the US did during WW2 in response to terrible things that the enemy did to us. Specifically, the atom bombs dropped on Japan, were to terrorize and shock Japanese people and emperor. In reality they saved a lot of lives on both sides. After that, conventions of war were changed.

To answer your question directly, blowing up a home of suspected insurgents does not equal the same. The people who are in there are involved and therefore fair game, or if not, should know not to be there.
 
As I alluded to earlier, there were a lot of terrible things that the US did during WW2 in response to terrible things that the enemy did to us. Specifically, the atom bombs dropped on Japan, were to terrorize and shock Japanese people and emperor. In reality they saved a lot of lives on both sides. After that, conventions of war were changed.

To answer your question directly, blowing up a home of suspected insurgents does not equal the same. The people who are in there are involved and therefore fair game, or if not, should know not to be there.

what part of the definition of "suspected" are you missing?
 
Are you trying to grant our enemies US citizen due process during war again? When you were in the Navy, did you wait until a jury convicted a suspect before you shot back at him?


so...what DO you say when you "suspect" a building to house insurgents and you blow it up without verifying it first, and it turns out to be the wrong building and actually an orphanage? "oops...my bad..... bygones!"????

of course, we know that the little ski bum has never actually had to make any sorts of tough decisions like that, but damn, he sure is brave sitting there behind his computer!
 
so...what DO you say when you "suspect" a building to house insurgents and you blow it up without verifying it first, and it turns out to be the wrong building and actually an orphanage? "oops...my bad..... bygones!"????

of course, we know that the little ski bum has never actually had to make any sorts of tough decisions like that, but damn, he sure is brave sitting there behind his computer!

My susggestion is go knock on the door and ask them if they house terrorist. I believe that is the most logical thing to do since intellegence gathering is so messed up these days:clap2:
 
so...what DO you say when you "suspect" a building to house insurgents and you blow it up without verifying it first, and it turns out to be the wrong building and actually an orphanage? "oops...my bad..... bygones!"????

of course, we know that the little ski bum has never actually had to make any sorts of tough decisions like that, but damn, he sure is brave sitting there behind his computer!
That's nice, but you did not answer the question.
 
Are you trying to grant our enemies US citizen due process during war again? When you were in the Navy, did you wait until a jury convicted a suspect before you shot back at him?

this question? it is stupid. where in your "suspected "scenario are the "suspects" in the house firing at us?

If they are shooting at us, they pretty much remove suspicion don't they? when have I ever suggested that hot pursuit was not appropriate?
 

Forum List

Back
Top