Knock it off, Naxos. You’re not contributing anything to this discussion.
Damuri Ajashi, you’re lucky to get off with another note rather than a warning here. You don’t have to like Ibn Warraq or agree with anything he says, but you do have to remain civil while talking to (or about) him and not respond to any perceived provocation. This is the last time you’ll be reminded about this.
I understand, but I asked about why the various Arab countries didn’t have a problem living around, even with Jews until Israel became a country, even before the Palestinians were displaced.
Are you trying to imply that it is only out of the goodness of their hearts that the Israelis are not engaging in genocide? That there wouldn’t be serious and devastating consequences from that sort of action?
Not sure what that has to do with the language you were responding to but if The Palestinians ever occupy Spain and treat the local the way that Israel is treating the Palestinians, you can expect similar criticism from me.
Like I said, you are merely stating that you prefer the status quo to the status ante. Thats fine but its not an argument.
Yeah, but the point was that the arabs do not in fact cataegorically refuse to recognize the state of israel. They may not be willing to do so on terms youa re happy with but they don’t have this undying hatred of jews that people seem to be using as a building block for their arguments.
I remember having a conversation about this before when I asked why it HAD to be Israel and not Brazil or some other place (there were a few potential locations at the time) and the exlpanation that was offered was that only Israel could have drawn the critical mass of Jews from around the world to create a viable state. So while the zionists might not have been overtly religious, at least some believe that they needed the draw of the religious appeal that a Jewish state in Israel presented to get people excited about the idea.
It was just one person’s opinion at the time but noone seemed to object to the theory.
How is that statement uncivil (at least compared to the statements that Ibn makes)? Its a fact. Would you like me to cite where he does exactly what I am talking about?
How is this unrebuked post not personal and uncivil but mine is?
“Damuri has a rather weird, somewhat disturbing fixation on me which has caused him to have a rather extensive history of repeatedly making passive-aggressive attacks on me, which is what I was responding to.”
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14490936&postcount=295
I will note you said “You can ridicule an argument, a failure in logic, or criticize a style. You are not allowed to do that by attacking the person who made the posts.”
Is it my use of the word pretext in the first post you reference? Because the meaning of the sentence does not really change without that word. If I should have just left it at “You frequently pick up on some lack of knowledge in the person you are arguing with and use that to dismiss them and their opinions entirely.” because the use of the word pretext was sopmehow derogatory then fine but I really think that these standards should be applied more evenly regardless of whether or not the poster is supporting or attacking a position that you hold.
The second post you reference is more a gripe about the modding and probably not appropriate, especially since the modding is generally very good in GD outside of Israel related threads where there seems to be assymetrical reaction to comments by posters depending on which side of the argument they are on.
The last post hardly seems insulting or uncivil. I see this sort of post from folks all the time.
Last week I told Ibn Warraq his comments about you were inappropriate, so I did not (and do not) want you to pick up on the same line of taunting. He’s not allowed to respond and the taunts contribute nothing to the thread. I don’t really want to hear about what he’s doing and why it’s worse.
I admit I probably should have also responded to Ibn Warraq’s comments about you. I got busy responding to private messages. That being said, if either of you has any further comments about moderating, post it in ATMB and not in the middle of the thread.
Yes, I am saying that. I support the Israelis because they are ‘better’ than their neighbors. Their actions prove it. The Palestinians still exist because of them being better. If their positions were reversed, we’d be talking about the horrible slaughter of the Jews and the Palestinians would be making excuses like the Turks do over the Armenians.
You are partially correct. They don’t hate Jews anymore than they hate any other religion (well, other than the Koran is filled with Mohammed fighting Jews). If Israel was made up of Hindus, well if it was made up of Hindus it probably wouldn’t have the support of the west and would have been wiped out long ago, actually.
The point being is that the land is historically Islamic (forgetting who was there before them as Muslims tend to do). It belongs to them and will always belong to them, according to them. The thought isn’t any different than the Jewish claim to the same area.
I think Isreal really needs to stop playing America’s provocateur in the middle east and mend some fences around there. Drop the reservationing of Palestine, drop the retaliation attacks for people not voting the way they like. In short stop the high risk high reward/penalty military/economic strategy and let the world become a little more peaceful.
(Que absurd knee-jerk responses)
Eh, an absurd, knee-jerk gloss doesn’t require one in response.
As it is you’re wrong on virtually every particular, from the fact that Israel isn’t the US’s provocateur to the fact that Israel has never attacked anybody “because of not voting the way they like”.
So there’s not really much to respond to.
You’re right that attack on Lebanon in 06’ had nothing to do with voting in Hezbollah. Must have been a weapons malfunction or something…
Yes, the above statement is correct. Israel’s 06 invasion of Lebanon had nothing to do with Lebanese elections.
BTW, what did you mean by “Hezbollah getting voted in”?
Are you under the impression that the Lebanese government was controlled by the Hezbollah?
eh meant hamas
Hard to tell them apart. One is a terrorist organization, the other is a terrorist organization that picks up trash for folks. 
and i guess i meant Palestine for voting the wrong way in 06’, the attack on Lebanon the same year was ridiculous for what they say they were responding to in any case.
Then, with all due respect, your comment makes even less sense and shows even less understanding of the situation and even less grasp of the basic facts of the situation..
You sarcastically retorted to Finn’s point by proclaiming.
And after I questioned you about this rather odd comment you said you meant to refer to Hamas not Hezbollah.
Well, Hamas isn’t in Lebanon, does not stand in Lebanese elections, nor does it have any members who are Lebanese, except perhaps for some Palestinians with Lebanese citizenship.
It is a Palestinian organization which stands for election in the occupied territories.
What you did was the equivalent of referring to Barack Obama as the Prime Minister of Canada and then declare that anyone who challenged your opinions of Canada was engaging in “absurd knee-jerk responses.”
Except they didn’t “attack Palestine” after Hamas was voted in.
They also didn’t initiate sanctions against Hamas’s government because they wanted to “punish people for voting the wrong way” (as is a rather disingenuous gloss of you to use), but because Hamas is an avowed, rejectionist, genocidal organization which holds to its position that it will never recognize Israel.
Just because it’s democratic doesn’t make it sacrosanct.
Ya well I’m obviously not at my best or the best to respond about those events right now regardless it is not disingenuous or a gloss that Israel has and does attack vastly inferiorly armed people for vastly smaller offenses than they themselves commit. The attack on Lebanon for killing 3 soldiers and kidnapping 2 others (to be used to get their people back that Israel had kidnapped) was absolutely ridiculous.
“…Large parts of the Lebanese civilian infrastructure were destroyed, including 400 miles (640 km) of roads, 73 bridges, and 31 other targets such as Beirut’s Rafic Hariri International Airport, ports, water and sewage treatment plants, electrical facilities, 25 fuel stations, 900 commercial structures, up to 350 schools and two hospitals, and 15,000 homes. Some 130,000 more homes were damaged… it has been widely reported that the majority of the Lebanese killed were civilians, and UNICEF estimated that 30% of Lebanese killed were children under the age of 13… the death toll at 1,123—37 soldiers and police officers, 894 identified victims, and 192 unidentified ones…the number of Lebanese injured to be 4,409,[41] 15% of whom were permanently disabled…since the end of fighting by land mines or unexploded Israeli cluster bombs.[20] Between the end of the war and November 2008, approximately 40 people were killed and over 270 injured by cluster bombs.” -Wikipedia
Arguing about this with people is usually not worthwhile though since they don’t consider a person from Lebanon or Palestine worth even 1/1000th of what an ally’s life is worth, even when they are clearly innocent civilians.
Ah, so that’s why you can’t keep the facts straight. Carry on.