Gaza started shooting rockets on Israel cities again

[logroller]

I don't really follow this. Since when could a terrorist attack (or in the case of an outfit like Hamas, an entire campaign of them !!) be considered a 'much needed lesson' applied to those on the receiving-end ?

Do criminals teach the police a 'much needed lesson' when they fire guns at police ?

Israel v 'Palestine' is a contest between a Nation State suffering terrorist attacks from Muslims who hate their guts, and a location (or so-called 'people') who are doing all the hating, and backing it up with murderous attacks. So .. 'tit for tat', I suggest, really doesn't cover it !!!

As for 'might makes right', well, Tyr has done one of his stellar jobs in answering you. I don't feel I need add a thing on that score.

Oh yeah, a stellar job indeed....of condoning fascist imperialism. I needn't any more added either; history is rife with supremacist ideologies driving national expansion.

The actions of the Israelis are AGAINST THE LAW: the illegal annexation of east jeruseleum; the illegal destruction of private property in occupied lands; the illegal displacement of civilians; and the illegal settlement in occupied lands...which makes Israel criminal. With the exception of east jeruseleum (which Israel alone deems legitimate), no one even disputes the illegality of Israel's actions, not even their own courts. That's not to say two wrongs make a right-- they don't-- but my opposition seems keen to ignore the facts which refute the narrative that Israel/Palestine is good/bad conflict.

Now I Submit as fact that IDF/'Civil Administration' doesn't make all Israelis criminals but neither do the actions of Hamas make all Palestinians criminals. Now if you prefer to think that by virtue of shared religion the predominantly muslim Palestine is culpable for the actions of their brethren then you must, likewise hold the Jewish population accountable for the actions their own....unless, that is to say you believe the Muslims to be an inferior people....in which case you join the legions of likewise motivated supremacists who believe that the universal moral imperative command that sword is the ultimate arbiter of justice. Perhaps it is, but then one can hardly condemn the savagery of beheading anymore than demolishing another's home. This is truth, like it or not.

Just a point of fact-- I disagree with jafar on whether Israel has a right to exist-- I believe they do. I believe his belief is untenable and derisive of the peace process and I invite him to debate me upon this one and one.

With that said, It is dishonest for others to accuse me of supporting those who hold the belief that Israel doesn't-- whether it be Hamas, Iran or another. I recognize how this logic performs as a rhetorical device but I HAVE put forth impartial evidence that a minority of either side hold ideological beliefs that reject peaceful coexistence. What I see is a bias towards rationalizing actions based upon this minority, and as tyr once stipulated: guiding our actions upon the beliefs of a minority is the preface of tyranny. I could hardly disagree.

So while I'm sure I've given you much to consider, Do you believe these 'people' (Palestinians) have a right to live in that location (Palestine), yes or no?

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

A Non-response...because the facts simply don't support your assertions tyr. please note that I assert the blame is shared, so I need not present support for a premise I haven't claimed but nonetheless who's the more relentless terrorist, really?
According to the United Nations, since 2000, and not including operation cast lead, the number of Palestinian civilians killed was 5 times the number of Israeli civilians killed. http://www.ifamericansknew.org/stats...es.html#source
There's no right side here; they're both to blame and they both need to knock off the bs. Pointing fingers doesn't help. I understand you don't like or trust Muslims and you're free to hold any opinion you desire but if you turn a blind eye to the injustice that has been committed by the Israelis than your heart is no less blackened than the muslim palis you despis-- I've little doubt Gandhi would agree with me on that.

A man has a right to not trust a poisonous snake or to fear a hungry tiger. Good judgment demands both cautions and actions that are necessarily taken in both cases. Do they have a right to live in the area --Yes. Are they living in the area already --yes. What I am adamantly against is their murdering ways and constant cry for foreign nations to aid them in their fight. A fight in which they employ the most evil and murderous tactics of terror. For me that points to the heart of the matter. Now you may point out Israeli's actions but like almost everything in this world one must always choose the lesser evil. I believe I have done so. I rely on my knowledge of history, the muslims and information gathered from various sources. If the Israeli's were using a campaign of terrorist tactics to deliberately murder their opposition I'd go against them too. Attacks delivered in response to the terrorist attacks of their enemies are not terrorism but justice delivered IMHO. Consider this if you will, they pull the tiger's tail(terrorist attacks-bombing) then step back and point at its response as aggression. I say stop pulling its damn tail but no they want to wage war the way they like. If Canada was will -nilly lobbing rockets, mortars and bombs on New York City murdering its citizens I doubt you would defend them in the manner you just did the Pali's. Am I right on that? Care to show me when the Palis have ever stopped except to reload and re-arm....-TYR

[aboutime]

Oh yeah, a stellar job indeed....of condoning fascist imperialism. I needn't any more added either; history is rife with supremacist ideologies driving national expansion.

The actions of the Israelis are AGAINST THE LAW: the illegal annexation of east jeruseleum; the illegal destruction of private property in occupied lands; the illegal displacement of civilians; and the illegal settlement in occupied lands...which makes Israel criminal. With the exception of east jeruseleum (which Israel alone deems legitimate), no one even disputes the illegality of Israel's actions, not even their own courts. That's not to say two wrongs make a right-- they don't-- but my opposition seems keen to ignore the facts which refute the narrative that Israel/Palestine is good/bad conflict.

Now I Submit as fact that IDF/'Civil Administration' doesn't make all Israelis criminals but neither do the actions of Hamas make all Palestinians criminals. Now if you prefer to think that by virtue of shared religion the predominantly muslim Palestine is culpable for the actions of their brethren then you must, likewise hold the Jewish population accountable for the actions their own....unless, that is to say you believe the Muslims to be an inferior people....in which case you join the legions of likewise motivated supremacists who believe that the universal moral imperative command that sword is the ultimate arbiter of justice. Perhaps it is, but then one can hardly condemn the savagery of beheading anymore than demolishing another's home. This is truth, like it or not.

Just a point of fact-- I disagree with jafar on whether Israel has a right to exist-- I believe they do. I believe his belief is untenable and derisive of the peace process and I invite him to debate me upon this one and one.

With that said, It is dishonest for others to accuse me of supporting those who hold the belief that Israel doesn't-- whether it be Hamas, Iran or another. I recognize how this logic performs as a rhetorical device but I HAVE put forth impartial evidence that a minority of either side hold ideological beliefs that reject peaceful coexistence. What I see is a bias towards rationalizing actions based upon this minority, and as tyr once stipulated: guiding our actions upon the beliefs of a minority is the preface of tyranny. I could hardly disagree.

So while I'm sure I've given you much to consider, Do you believe these 'people' (Palestinians) have a right to live in that location (Palestine), yes or no?

NOTHING DISHONEST ABOUT USING THE TRUTH to make a point..which you refuse to address honestly. So. I am still convinced...you, and jafar fully support Hamas, and Hezbolla. Intentionally overlooking, and denying that Israeli's have a right to defend themselves.
You condone Palestinian rocket attacks as their right. But you deny Israel the same???
HYPOCRISY is your game, and HYPOCRISY is your name.

[Drummond]

Oh yeah, a stellar job indeed....of condoning fascist imperialism. I needn't any more added either; history is rife with supremacist ideologies driving national expansion.

The actions of the Israelis are AGAINST THE LAW: the illegal annexation of east jeruseleum; the illegal destruction of private property in occupied lands; the illegal displacement of civilians; and the illegal settlement in occupied lands...which makes Israel criminal. With the exception of east jeruseleum (which Israel alone deems legitimate), no one even disputes the illegality of Israel's actions, not even their own courts. That's not to say two wrongs make a right-- they don't-- but my opposition seems keen to ignore the facts which refute the narrative that Israel/Palestine is good/bad conflict.

Now I Submit as fact that IDF/'Civil Administration' doesn't make all Israelis criminals but neither do the actions of Hamas make all Palestinians criminals. Now if you prefer to think that by virtue of shared religion the predominantly muslim Palestine is culpable for the actions of their brethren then you must, likewise hold the Jewish population accountable for the actions their own....unless, that is to say you believe the Muslims to be an inferior people....in which case you join the legions of likewise motivated supremacists who believe that the universal moral imperative command that sword is the ultimate arbiter of justice. Perhaps it is, but then one can hardly condemn the savagery of beheading anymore than demolishing another's home. This is truth, like it or not.

Just a point of fact-- I disagree with jafar on whether Israel has a right to exist-- I believe they do. I believe his belief is untenable and derisive of the peace process and I invite him to debate me upon this one and one.

With that said, It is dishonest for others to accuse me of supporting those who hold the belief that Israel doesn't-- whether it be Hamas, Iran or another. I recognize how this logic performs as a rhetorical device but I HAVE put forth impartial evidence that a minority of either side hold ideological beliefs that reject peaceful coexistence. What I see is a bias towards rationalizing actions based upon this minority, and as tyr once stipulated: guiding our actions upon the beliefs of a minority is the preface of tyranny. I could hardly disagree.

So while I'm sure I've given you much to consider, Do you believe these 'people' (Palestinians) have a right to live in that location (Palestine), yes or no?

First point .. I don't think that 'Fascist imperialism' applies at all. Certainly not where Israel is concerned, anyway.

Judgment calls like that one are made from a mindset, a psychology, which people such as you and I can afford and be attuned to because we live in societies which enjoy at least a reasonable level of security and stability ('9/11' and '7/7' notwithstanding). But .. that same standard can hardly be applied to Israel, and her history from 1948 onwards. She has been surrounded with Nation States totally hostile to her very existence. Wars have been fought based on race and religious hatreds. Israel is armed to the teeth, massively so compared to her neighbours, because she has no choice in the matter: and even despite THIS being true, she still suffers terrorist bombardments and holocaustal threats .. and with the Nation State which issued these, developing a very technology suited to making good on them !!

Imagine the mindset of a people enduring all of this level of threat, enduring it for committing the 'crime' of mere EXISTENCE. Isn't it obvious that nobody can expect the same moderation and restraints to be natural to that mindset ? More -- consider the propaganda war still being ranged against Israel by a terrorist State, run by terrorists, who claim that THEY are victims, when the truth is that their very Charter is implacably committed to warfare against those they claim 'victimise' them ??

So you see, it just isn't reasonable to expect the same standards that you and I enjoy through our far more secure existences.

You say that the actions of Hamas don't make all Palestinians criminals. Literally speaking, I must agree. Nonetheless .. Hamas does govern Gaza because the population there voted them into power, which means that there is a clear case to be made that Hamas DOES represent Palestinians as a whole. Like it or not, that population bears responsibility for what they've given power to, through democratic means.

If, somehow, the American people managed to vote terrorists into the White House, would you not think that it was the electorate that held responsibility for that ?? Who ELSE would you care to blame ?

You say that 'a minority of either side hold ideological beliefs that reject peaceful coexistence.' Where Hamas - the GOVERNING power in Gaza - is concerned, how can that be considered a 'minority', when warfare, a blanket rejection of peace processes, is written into their very Charter, 'enshrined' as a bog-standard yardstick from which they are mandated to operate ??? Hamas exists to oppose Israel, and to smash its existence !! No latitude for any permanent variation from that position is possible, for as long as their Charter exists.

Do you not think that Israel knows this, and further knows how implacable the forces are which are ranged against it ? Is it any wonder that they're inclined to NOT show them the level of respect and deference which you somehow think is their duty ?

[aboutime]

First point .. I don't think that 'Fascist imperialism' applies at all. Certainly not where Israel is concerned, anyway.

Judgment calls like that one are made from a mindset, a psychology, which people such as you and I can afford and be attuned to because we live in societies which enjoy at least a reasonable level of security and stability ('9/11' and '7/7' notwithstanding). But .. that same standard can hardly be applied to Israel, and her history from 1948 onwards. She has been surrounded with Nation States totally hostile to her very existence. Wars have been fought based on race and religious hatreds. Israel is armed to the teeth, massively so compared to her neighbours, because she has no choice in the matter: and even despite THIS being true, she still suffers terrorist bombardments and holocaustal threats .. and with the Nation State which issued these, developing a very technology suited to making good on them !!

Imagine the mindset of a people enduring all of this level of threat, enduring it for committing the 'crime' of mere EXISTENCE. Isn't it obvious that nobody can expect the same moderation and restraints to be natural to that mindset ? More -- consider the propaganda war still being ranged against Israel by a terrorist State, run by terrorists, who claim that THEY are victims, when the truth is that their very Charter is implacably committed to warfare against those they claim 'victimise' them ??

So you see, it just isn't reasonable to expect the same standards that you and I enjoy through our far more secure existences.

You say that the actions of Hamas don't make all Palestinians criminals. Literally speaking, I must agree. Nonetheless .. Hamas does govern Gaza because the population there voted them into power, which means that there is a clear case to be made that Hamas DOES represent Palestinians as a whole. Like it or not, that population bears responsibility for what they've given power to, through democratic means.

If, somehow, the American people managed to vote terrorists into the White House, would you not think that it was the electorate that held responsibility for that ?? Who ELSE would you care to blame ?

You say that 'a minority of either side hold ideological beliefs that reject peaceful coexistence.' Where Hamas - the GOVERNING power in Gaza - is concerned, how can that be considered a 'minority', when warfare, a blanket rejection of peace processes, is written into their very Charter, 'enshrined' as a bog-standard yardstick from which they are mandated to operate ??? Hamas exists to oppose Israel, and to smash its existence !! No latitude for any permanent variation from that position is possible, for as long as their Charter exists.

Do you not think that Israel knows this, and further knows how implacable the forces are which are ranged against it ? Is it any wonder that they're inclined to NOT show them the level of respect and deference which you somehow think is their duty ?

Sir Drummond. What I find most interesting about how this thread has developed is. I suspect, we have actually, and subliminally been introduced to RELATIVES in Jafar, an Logroller.
This man would be so proud of how the both of them so fully approve, and support Hamas.

[logroller]

Sir Drummond. What I find most interesting about how this thread has developed is. I suspect, we have actually, and subliminally been introduced to RELATIVES in Jafar, an Logroller.
This man would be so proud of how the both of them so fully approve, and support Hamas.

So Arafat was a supporter of Hamas? Intriguing considering that fatah and Hamas were/ are political rivals. Way to not let facts get in the way of your trolling.

[aboutime]

So Arafat was a supporter of Hamas? Intriguing considering that fatah and Hamas were/ are political rivals. Way to not let facts get in the way of your trolling.

OH MY. You are defending against it...because I said something you didn't like. How comical of you?
So what?
ARAFAT could be, and might be still living...as far as those you defend so well might think.
They made him a Martyr long ago, and you..of all people, who claim to be so much smarter than the rest of us...should know. Those people...no matter what group you call them....still desire to NEVER GET ANY PEACEFUL resolutions to the Middle East problems.
So..you defend them anyway...since it's more fun for you to point out MY errors..using the wrong name, than to honestly admit. You either want to be their defender, or you can choose to be against them. LIKE THINKING PEOPLE who do not defend them...as you do.

[logroller]

OH MY. You are defending against it...because I said something you didn't like. How comical of you?
So what?
ARAFAT could be, and might be still living...as far as those you defend so well might think.
They made him a Martyr long ago, and you..of all people, who claim to be so much smarter than the rest of us...should know. Those people...no matter what group you call them....still desire to NEVER GET ANY PEACEFUL resolutions to the Middle East problems.
So..you defend them anyway...since it's more fun for you to point out MY errors..using the wrong name, than to honestly admit. You either want to be their defender, or you can choose to be against them. LIKE THINKING PEOPLE who do not defend them...as you do.

I realize it's a foreign concept to 'like-thinking people', but I think for myself.
its not that I didn't like what you said, its that what you said is smply untrue. For example:
'Arafat the martyr'....despite the fact I've never mentioned, let alone defended him. Whatever conspiracy theory you wish to promulgate about some mystery poison is a pittance of reality compared to the factual certainty of a right wing Israeli assassinating Rabin (arafat's counterpart in the Oslo peace agreements). But like I said, don't let facts interfere with your trolling.
Your flaws aren't in poor word choice but a fundamental failure of logic predicated upon false assumption.

And please point out where I claimed to be smarter than anyone else. The fact of the matter is that claim has been been put forth by others, not I, and this makes it hard to be humble. But not so with respect to your asserting such; you don't set the bar very high.

[aboutime]

I realize it's a foreign concept to 'like-thinking people', but I think for myself.
its not that I didn't like what you said, its that what you said is smply untrue. For example:
'Arafat the martyr'....despite the fact I've never mentioned, let alone defended him. Whatever conspiracy theory you wish to promulgate about some mystery poison is a pittance of reality compared to the factual certainty of a right wing Israeli assassinating Rabin (arafat's counterpart in the Oslo peace agreements). But like I said, don't let facts interfere with your trolling.
Your flaws aren't in poor word choice but a fundamental failure of logic predicated upon false assumption.

And please point out where I claimed to be smarter than anyone else. The fact of the matter is that claim has been been put forth by others, not I, and this makes it hard to be humble. But not so with respect to your asserting such; you don't set the bar very high.

No bar required when looking down at you. Need a shovel, or a ladder?
Bet you are still really, really impressed with your self-gratification in using the language like Obama. Sadly. The ONE person who is impressed...remains you.
You practice your patronizing so often, and so well. You should award yourself like Obama did.

[logroller]

No bar required when looking down at you. Need a shovel, or a ladder?
Bet you are still really, really impressed with your self-gratification in using the language like Obama. Sadly. The ONE person who is impressed...remains you.
You practice your patronizing so often, and so well. You should award yourself like Obama did.

the truth of the matter is id much prefer that you try to honesty debate with facts and sound logic. so how about a one-on-one--the topic: Israeli destruction of Palestinian homes is an illegal act. I'll even let you choose for or against.

[gabosaurus]

the truth of the matter is id much prefer that you try to honesty debate with facts and sound logic.

You do realize who you are talking to, right? You will find a beach full of penguins before you get facts and sound logic from AT.

[aboutime]

You do realize who you are talking to, right? You will find a beach full of penguins before you get facts and sound logic from AT.

GABBY and LOT. A FULL HOUSE couldn't beat the TWO of you as a Pair.

[logroller]

GABBY and LOT. A FULL HOUSE couldn't beat the TWO of you as a Pair.

I've issued a challenge. You in or what?

[aboutime]

I've issued a challenge. You in or what?

Not possible. You ARE the challenged one.