Alas, I don’t think I ever am.
December
By reading your reply I can see that you are incapable of any critical thought about Israel.
You make mention of corrupt and dictatorial Arab leaders, and you wash them all with the same brush, and only make the slightest of mention of any that do not fit into this view.
You stereotype entire nations, peoples, systems with little or no analysis, just a regurgitaion of things you have seen on the net from sources whose objectivity are doubtful.
December
Please answer a question for me, and perhaps explain, do you think that it is a good policy to stettle inhabitants upon lands that you have taken by force from their previous occupants?
If you do, then could you please explain why.
I have no difficulty with the idea of depopulating a buffer zone for protection but the outright theft of good land is disquieting.
I do not accept the specious argument that this land did not belong to Palestine because Palestine is not and was not a nation.
The reason I reject this argument is simply that the land still belongs to its residents, no matter what you choose to call the state in which they lived.
This occupation of territory is one of the hubs around which the conflict rotates, so I would appreciate your commentary on this matter.
I read the article, dec, and as I said on the last post overleaf, you raised a few good points.
I’d be less inclined to call you a liar if your OP was “I can’t believe how inhumane this Guardian journalist is!” But it wasn’t. It claimed the Guardian thought it’s OK to kill Israelis.
I recall a Pit thread a few months ago (swallowed, alas, in the Great Disaster) where you asserted to me words to the effect that it was OK to bulldoze Palestinian people’s homes because Palestinian children might grow up to be suicide bombers. Remember that? Also, in this thread, I asked the question:
You sidestepped it because according to you, your OP
So, prove to me whether you’re a bigot or not.
Do you think the life of a Palestinian civilian is worth the same as that of an Israeli citizen?
december’s structural handbook for thread making:
[ol][li]Author an OP full of support pandering, provocation, and baiting. Do not bother about fact and truth. Your aim at this point is not truly to debate but to provoke other to debate for you. Remember that you should at least have one irrelevant and to the readership offensive sideline in this OP, otherwise they might not answer you.[/li]
[li]Await results.[/li]
[li]When the readership has started replying in force post a ‘clarification’ to seemingly make the OP look honest. Bait this clarification with some seemingly innocuous, but highly poisonous red herrings. Sprinkle it with a few generalizations that seem sympathetic to your cause.[/li]
[li]As the replies come in spend some time willfully ignoring all serious replies that attack your position. Throw more data in that seems to support at least the basis of your stand (doesn’t matter if it is relevant to the OP or not). Take other posters statements out of context and use them as basis for your own arguments. Carry on doing this as long as you can. Only abandon this phase when your own side is so fed up with your baiting that they start direct attacks on you.[/li]
[li]Start making concessions to all the irrelevant details you never intended to debate anyway. This makes you look like you’re honest to the less cunning readers. Make sure that you make a point that serves your real agenda each time you make a concession.[/li]
[li]If the criticism doesn’t subside and/or respectable posters/mods/administrators seem close to chastising you for real… make full retraction with plausible explanation as to why it was a mistake.[/ol]Willful baiting, continuous provocation, repeated backpedaling and halfhearted concessions while still continuing provocative posts… what’s the word we use for that behavior again?[/li]
Sparc
Fuck you, you little turd. Being a 59 year old actuary from New Jersey does not make you a font of wisdom. If it is naive to actually read and comprehend something for what it says, not read into something a bias that some other organization told you to read into it, I’ll be naive any day.
Sua
December may have started out with honest intentions, but this latest rash of threads is as trollish as any I’ve ever read.
That’s a good question. Let me outline a few points that I see as relevant.[ul][li]It’s done in wars all the time. E.g., [/li]-- much of southwestern United States was taken by force from Mexico.
– Rome took Great Britain by force from the Angles and Celts. (correct me if I’m wrong.)
– Many Europeans are living on land taken by force from Jews.
– Land between Germany and France has been taken and re-taken by force in various wars
– Many Jews in Israel were forcefully dislodged from their land in Arab countries…[li]Regardless of the settlements, Israel specifically offered to give back something llike 95% of the land 2 years ago.Note that Israel was defending itself in the wars in which it captured this land.[/ul]To answer your specific question, I would tend to question whether it’s good policy for Israel to build these settlements. [/li]
However, I don’t agree that the settlements are an important cause of Middle East tensions. On the contrary, I think they’re just an excuse used to score political points and to foment hatred.
Presumably, the importance of the settlements in that they suggest or hint that Israel will not return the land needed for a Palestinian state. But, we do not need to think about suggestions or hints. Israel actually offered a Palestinian state. Arafat turned it down.
BTW, when Palestinians terrorize settlers. some media make a point of emphasizing the settler status, as it that as some sort of justification. But, of course, Palestinians are also terrrorizing non-settler Israelis. The intifada is against all of Israel, not just the settlements.
There was no settlements when Israel was founded in 1948. Arabs found other reasons to attack Israel and to keep on attacking. I see the current intifada as a continuation of a war against Israel that is in its 54[sup]th[/sup] year.
I am more partial to Israeli. First of all, I’m Jewish. Israel represents my homeland.
Also I share Israel’s values much more than the Palestinians’. E.g., Israel shows tolerance for gays; Palestinians torture them.
I don’t think this debate is really about concern for the welfare of the Palestinian people. Israel treats Palestinians a helova lot better than Arafat does, and better than other Arab leaders do. If the all the Jews are driven out and Arafat gains control, the lives of the Arabs will be worsened.
You may disagree. If so, I don’t accuse you of being bigoted against Arabs; we would simply have different judgments.
Odd, I figured America is your homeland. Als, it’s good that you have finally come out of the closet as a full-on racist. Now there’s no ambiguity.
In what current European country is this land you speak of? And what country drove the Jews away and took it?
My God. You don’t think the settlements are important? You don’t think that Jewish settlements in land that has been declared Palestinian might, you know, piss the inhabitants off? You’re beyond help, then.
But surely, throwing rocks at a foreign people occupying your land is a little more understandable than suicide bombings. No one here is claiming the Intifada is a good thing - but that doesn’t mean we can’t understand Palestinian outrage towards Jewish settlements.
Nice dodge there, december. “More partial to”. C’mon, say it already. You think Palestinian lives are inferior.
:wally
Not to be on December’s side or anything, but I’m a little taken aback that somebody from Europe is overlooking that unpleasantness half a century ago. You know, when 2/3 of European Jewry were murdered? What do you think happened to their property?
I am of course fully aware of the Holocaust and its consequences, gobear.
But december lists it as an example in a list of border disputes settled by war, and foreign occupation. Horrific as the Holocaust was, it is not the same as the other examples. I’m not overlooking it, it’s just not comparable.
You have a point Coldfire, although it is a valid example of inhabitants upon lands that have been taken by force from their previous occupants.
There’s another difference. In this case, the inhabitant living on land taken by force might just be you.
gobear, perhaps you weren’t aware, but one reason Israel was established was to have a “Jewish Homeland.”
I don’t think it’s racist to be partial to one group of people, rather than another. First of all, Israel isn’t a race. Second of all, none of us is totally impartial between all groupings of people. Nobody could be,
Sua Sponte, it’s notable that you went ballistic when I merely called my critics naive in a thread where I have now been called all of the following:
quite simply, a liar and a bigot.
one-sided, totally blinkered view of the world
morally bankrupt
childish,
irrelevant,
non-constructive.
trollish
tin foil
stupidity
tiresome one trick pony
you mook
lying fuck
incapable of any critical thought about Israel.
little turd
full-on racist
If you’re trying to condescend, it’s not working. sure, Israle was created to be a Jewish homeland for dispossessed European Jewry, but you’re an American. Israel may be the spiritual home of the Jews, but it is not your country.
Israel is not a race, but Palestinian is certainly an ethnicity, a sub-race if you will, and you have already assented that you regard their lives as inferior.
And no, none of us is impartial. I am rabidly pro-American, but that doesn’t mean that I think that non-American lives are inferior.
Wahahahahahaha! “Suggest”? “Hint”? :: Snort :: Nothing says “We may not give this land back” like building a town on it.
The problem with your “debates,” DECEMBER, is that you are so willing to distort the position you disagree with, and so willing to gloss over any legitimate criticism of the position you support, that all that is left is glaring evidence of your bias. This does not encourage others to consider the issue from your point of view.
I have a quick question for the mods (pardon the hijack):
How does the title of this thread not violate the spirit (if not the letter) of the policy Ed has posted conveniently at the top of every forum (Don’t falsely attribute quotes to other SDMB members)?
I realize that The Guardian is not now (and probably won’t ever be) a “member” per the policy, but it is pretty obvious that the title of this thread falls under:
IANAL, but if The Guardian could show reasonable evidence that subscription(s) or ad(s) were cancelled due to someone believing that the quote contained in the title was actually made by them (I’m assuming that it wasn’t), wouldn’t that be actionable?
So, WHAT?
Just say it out right, and quit being a goddamn weasel, december.
ARE THE LIVES OF ISRAELIES MORE VALUABLE THAN THOSE OF PALESTINIANS???
Just answer yes or no.
Get the FUCK off of that cross before I climb up there and yank you off and throw you across the West Bank.* You’ve done nothing but insinuate that anyone who disagrees with your extremist views is an anti-semite who supports terrorism. You’ve tried to defend fucking Pinochet, you claimed that JanL was a loony-but, it was only fair because us “liberals” get away with it constantly.
Disengenious much?
december, fuck you. You’re a disgrace to everything this board stands for. I’ve had it with you and your baiting. If you ask me, you’ve gone beyond just being a jerk-I think you’re trying to qualify for Jerk of Jerks.
*Metaphorically speaking, of course.
Dopers, I appologize for my harsh language, but I really have reached my breaking point. Yeah, I know, Kathi, don’t read it, don’t let it get to you, but it’s so freaking ANNOYING!!!
No, gobear, I wasn’t trying to condescend. I now see where the confusion lies. Israel was designed to be the “homeland of the Jewish people”, not just European Jews.
I don’t understand your distinction. What does it mean in practice?
grem0517 – your point is well-taken. I ought to have omitted the quotation marks.
I’m putting the original, clearly, here so that I’m not accused of putting words in someone’s mouth:
[1859] Them niggers ought to be happy. If they was in Aferca right now, some other nigger’d be trying to kill 'em with a spear. Hayell, we treat them niggers better than their own niggers treat 'em.[/1859 (or in some cases, 2002)]
[1960]We whites treat those colored better than they treat themselves. Why should they vote or have equal rights. Obviously, they’re mentally incapable of making good decisions. [/1960]
[2002] Why are all the blacks on welfare and having abortions and having lots of kids to make their welfare checks bigger to take my tax dollars? And people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and Michael Jackson and Puff Daddy just make those blacks look worse. If they’d just take on white culture and not bitch about it, everything would be fine. [/2002]
The above hyperbole is brought to you by the “december is an ass” foundation. For information on funding grants to those who point out that december is an ass, please send $100 to me and I’ll get back to you.
Simple distinction. Your statement was false; the other statements were true.
Sua
stofsky, I was struck by your term “equal rights.” Palestinians living under Arafat hardly have any rights. Except, if they’re gay, they have the right to be tortured by the government. 