Real World Event Discussions
Israel about to get its ass kicked
POSTED BY: piratenews
UPDATED: Wednesday, July 9, 2025 04:47
VIEWED: 15936
PAGE 10 of 22
Sunday, January 4, 2009 11:42 PM
Quote:I’d love to see where I said that. Why don’t you provide a quote?
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Whatever. Most people on this forum consider me reasonable. I rarely get irritated, but read back: cumhal's treatment of the holocaust above, never once acknowledging that perhaps it is wrong to accuse descendents of holocaust survivors for causing the holocaust.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, January 5, 2009 5:51 AM
Geezer:
Quote:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
In Iraq, the pentagon stated that a certain number of IED attacks were actually our guys driving over own unexploded cluster munitions. When asked for a number, they said "could be as high as 95%."
Could you provide a cite for this?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
I posted the link when it happened. I think it was Rummy's last or close to last conference, or just after he quit. around that time.
If I run across the link, I'll repost.
By no means do I intend to imply that there are no IEDs. A close friend of mine had his ear blown off when one was thrown into his Hummer in Baghdad.
A great deal has been written about landmine scattering because it violates the land mine treaty, which specifies that all nations maintain exact coordinates of all mines placed so that they can be removed after the war. It's been widely used by the US since Kosovo, and the Israeli condemnation of our cluster mines leading to their lebanese defeat is also worth reading.
Lebanon and Hezbollah rejoiced in victory celebration, but in reality, they had barely fired a shot. The Israelis quickly realized that they could not complete the mission without heavy home casualties due to the mines.
The nature of the cluster bomb is such that the cargo is not immediated known, and the substitution was a last minute decision. My suspicion is that this is stupidity rather than malice, since "newer is better" is a common train of thought, and the Israeli plan called for using a WWII era weapon. Which, for the record, probably would have worked.
The attack was a PR disaster as well. It raised Nazrallah to messiah status, and brought support for Hezbollah to an all time high, bringing in not only Sunni support, but Christians as well. Israel would have done much better to play to the Christian sympathies and against communist influence.
I feel no restraint is needed in saying that Israel makes a strategic error consistently in resorting to the gun too quickly. The US, China, and Russia are no different.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, January 5, 2009 5:52 AM
KPO
Quote:
What did he say exactly, could you quote it? I never saw anything.
I'm saddened by your account of the price your family on your father's side paid during the war, as I am by all personal accounts of suffering in the holocaust - but I'm also wary that personal suffering should never be a trump card people can play to take the moral high ground and win arguments.
Whether or not you have a reasonable worldview (I haven't read all of your words), your first words to me were an invitation to defend myself from the charge of being a fascist, and you never really recovered in my eyes - when you apportioned zero complicity to Hamas for the rocket attacks I'm afraid I lost interest.
As I say you have your own considered, established view of the situation, and so do I. Since your conclusions are so strange to me I don't hold out much hope for intellectual common ground.
I hold to very little, except a respect for the sanctity of life, all life, and a mistrust of power, especially in excessive amounts, worst when centralized and single minded of purpose. My positions on issues that sway many voters are often changed by people here and elsewhere. I've just changed a position on the 2nd amendment, the fourth time I've done so in my life. The in favor crowd won me over in a recent debate.
I am sorry that I hurled insults at people who offended me. It's difficult to offend me, but not impossible, it has only happened twice in four years.
It was not I who pulled out the holocaust as a trump card. Never in years here have I discussed my losses to the holocaust. I have still not gone to the point of saying that though we think of ourselves as a free market society, we all inherit something. I grew up underground, as a child, I worked for pennies, literally, so that I could by food, to share. My fathers family were billionaires. Their fortune was estimated to be one of the largest ever. This never dismayed me, except that the seized wealth was undoubtedly used to fund the war machine. Tragic loss of life happened before my time, people I never knew, so my family was small, my name obscure and my existance impoverished. I don't hate. Control over such feelings is core to the tenets of my belief, and I feel ashamed when pushed to the limit.
But someone did just that, by pulling out the holocaust card in a completely bogus manner, to use against me, which was just insult to injury.
Consider that often homeless, poor, even starving, I have no real education, four years of intermittent elementary school. The reference is gone now, he must have edited it out. The insinuation was that I was looking forward to a second holocaust against the jews, more than insinuation, outright stated, that because I do not support the invasion of Gaza, I am a "jew hater" and apologists for the islamofascists. This shouldn't have even meritted a response.
Ignorance reigns, apparently at military intelligence.
New information on Hamas that I was sent by a jewish friend last night made me change my position. I posted it, but the gist was that, as a palestinian sympathizer himself, said that Hamas moved in when the PLO abdicated the fight by signing on to things like Carter's peace deal. Islamic Militants saw this as weak and doomed, and wanted to fight, and Hamas moved in with strong foriegn assistance from neighboring arab states.
That assistance, he said, was control, from people in the arab world who didn't want peace, but were willing to sacrifice palestine to keep the fight against the jewish people alive. Hamas was an agent of intollerance, and no friend of the palestinians. His argument was convincing. He didn't support the invasion, did support humanitarian aid, but didn't have a solution.
As is often the case in these debates, one person strikes a deep invective that scars and insults, and other people unwittingly pile on by defending the position, unaware of the offense just committed. You can't have known, and my apologies for lashing out at everyone who was defending Israel's actions.
At the m
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, January 5, 2009 6:11 AM
Quote:It’s pretty common knowledge that Hamas is heavily supported from sources external to Israel and the Palestinian territories. One of my very first points in this discussion was that this external funding had to be dealt with before any resolution could come. But you have this strange unhealthily love affair with Hamas. Even when you finally admit that you’re wrong, you still can’t bring yourself to accept that the righteous Hamas could have any culpability in the current events. I don’t know what you find so fuzzy and lovable about these people, but they are anything but. Hamas is built on the concept of killing Jews. It’s in their damn mission statement for Christ sake. They are not being coerced into attacking Israel. They are perfectly capable of doing that all by themselves.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
At the moment, I'm forced to review my analysis of Israel's action as more to be pitied than censured. If Hamas is an agent of intollerance funded by Sunni extremists as my jewish friend suggests, and I have no reason to doubt, and their game is to keep this conflict alive and make Israel and the Jewish people look bad, and sacrifice the palestinians, who the other arabs view as poor, uneducated, and in many nations, as literally "a slave race," then Israel fell for it hook line and sinker.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, January 5, 2009 6:48 AM
Quote:
It’s pretty common knowledge that Hamas is heavily supported from sources external to Israel and the Palestinian territories. One of my very first points in this discussion was that this external funding had to be dealt with before any resolution could come. But you have this strange unhealthily love affair with Hamas. Even when you finally admit that you’re wrong, you still can’t bring yourself to accept that the righteous Hamas could have any culpability in the current events. I don’t know what you find so fuzzy and lovable about these people, but they are anything but. Hamas is built on the concept of killing Jews. It’s in their damn mission statement for Christ sake. They are not being coerced into attacking Israel. They are perfectly capable of doing that all by themselves.
Do not bait me to debate. This post is a rant of personal attacks and bigotry, and not worthy of a response.
I was aware of the foreign funding, but not to the extend that it was essentially a foreign created entity. I have always had a deep dislike for Hamas, which began with their celebrations of successful terrorist attacks during their pre-political days. I merely states that they are the democratically elected govt. of Palestine, and while I'm no great fan of democracy, that in itself would encourage them to act in their own self interest.
Any govt. is capable of doing anything. The US govt. is capable of turning on its own people and attacking them for no reason, and has done so many times in the past. I'm no fan of govt.
I'm simply stating my position, with the only slight modification that it was a foreign-generated entity, which does subtract from its legitimacy if I cared, but also subtracts from the degree to which they are likely to care about the lives of palestinians.
I am not debating your rant. I'm defending my own position, as mischaracterized above, again.
In the future, please stop. I will not allow you to define my positions, and in so doing I will have to waste my time.
The only reason I can attempt to appeal to is that you must also waste your time in order to defame me.
I possess nothing, you are a man of prestige and power, it seems odd that you should care to try to discredit me. I see no reason why you should care.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, January 5, 2009 7:19 AM
Quote:uhm, okay.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Do not bait me to debate. This post is a rant of personal attacks and bigotry, and not worthy of a response.
Quote:Hamas may be an elected government but that doesn’t mean that it will act its own self interest or its people’s self-interest. Hamas is an ideologically driven faction devoted to the promotion of hating Jews and killing Israelis. There entire existence is devoted to make Israel an Islamic state. In their view, that’s their only self-interest. And they will do this to their own demise if necessary.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I was aware of the foreign funding, but not to the extend that it was essentially a foreign created entity. I have always had a deep dislike for Hamas, which began with their celebrations of successful terrorist attacks during their pre-political days. I merely states that they are the democratically elected govt. of Palestine, and while I'm no great fan of democracy, that in itself would encourage them to act in their own self interest.
The scorpion made a deal with the crocodile to take it across the Nile on its back. The Crocodile was hesitate to do this because it knew that the scorpion could sting it and kill it, but it went along because it logically thought that the scorpion would not risk its own life. Halfway across the Nile the scorpion stung the crocodile and as both began to sink to their death, the Crocodile asked “Why? Now we will both die.” To which the scorpion responded, “Because this is the Middle East.”
Quote:I respond to your posts because at the moment your view of Hamas is curious. Whatever prestige or power I may have means nothing here. I’m just an opinionated Browncoat, just like you.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
I possess nothing, you are a man of prestige and power, it seems odd that you should care to try to discredit me. I see no reason why you should care.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, January 5, 2009 1:55 PM
Quote:
your view of Hamas is curious
I'm not their fans, I never was. Humans act logically unless under the influence of drugs. They're no different than any other animal.
No nation is actually more responsible for the Govt. of Hamas than us: We pushed Palestine to become a democracy and elect a govt. It was probably a no brainer that this is who they would elect, just like Iraq electing Al Sadr's party. Ultimately, the Afghans will elect the Taliban. As soon as the Taliban realize this, the will stop fighting.
The whole situation is a hitch that in the master plan somewhere we overlooked. We assumed that they would elect reasonable people that we would have elected. They didn't.
One Iranian I know, who voted for Reform, said to me after the showdown began with the west, "I wish I could go back and vote for the Islamic Engineers instead." He lives here, of course, and doesn't want death to America, but he said "It was a better choice for Iran, and I was thinking what would be best for the US." But the people who live there are never thinking what would be best for the US. We don't go to the polls thinking "What would be great for China?"
I know someone married to a chinese woman who would defend china to the ends of the earth who voted for obama, who had taken an almost racist tack against everything chinese. But he was voting for what was best for the US.
The Palestinians voted the way they thought best. In the middle east, people are still people. If Hamas shows that they are the patriots willing to stand up to the west, especially if they should, like hezbollah, by some freak, win, then the people will reward them.
Think about 9-11, and Bush and Rudy Giuliani. Now, you don't have to take my angle that Bush and Rudy were the attackers inside guys to realize that Bush and Rudy did nothing to defend america. Nothing at all, on that day. And yet that very same day, they were catapulted to heroes because they were defending america.
Humans crave a hero. If they don't have one, the make one up, or cling to what they can. First John Kerry was a war hero, and then John McCain. In McCain's own word's his heroism: to disobey orders and drop a bomb on a town. Sure, he also endured extra torture, whether this was to get them to free others, or as he said in his book "to spite" Recalling his own experience, Kerry pulled a man out of the water, during or near a firefight, but when asked to relay a tale of heroism, he told us the story of shooting some vc kid in the back.
Here's a war hero:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4589486.stm
Most people don't have heroes, and so they put the image onto the people they do have.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, January 5, 2009 2:14 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Geezer:Quote:
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
In Iraq, the pentagon stated that a certain number of IED attacks were actually our guys driving over own unexploded cluster munitions. When asked for a number, they said "could be as high as 95%."
Could you provide a cite for this?
"Keep the Shiny side up"
I posted the link when it happened. I think it was Rummy's last or close to last conference, or just after he quit. around that time.
If I run across the link, I'll repost.
I tried googling "could be as high as 95%." and "cluster bomb", and variations, and couldn't come up with anything about this. Until you provide a cite, I guess it'll have to be considered apocryphal and not usable to support your argument. To do otherwise would allow you, or anyone else, to just make up stuff.
"Keep the Shiny side up"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, January 5, 2009 2:27 PM
apocryphal means hidden.
I saw the newscast. I'm sure that if you scan press conference on IEDs and cluster munitions around the time, you'll find it. I'm too busy, and don't care enough about winning an argument.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Monday, January 5, 2009 2:46 PM
Quote:You’re naive.
Originally posted by dreamtrove:Quote:
your view of Hamas is curious
I'm not their fans, I never was. Humans act logically unless under the influence of drugs. They're no different than any other animal.
Also I think Geezer has a point. You need to provide evidence for your own claims. Telling people to find evidence of your own outrageous claims is another thing that causes you to loose your own credibility.
Nihil est incertius vulgo, nihil obscurius voluntate hominum, nihil fallacius ratione tota comitiorum.
Nothing is more unpredictable than the mob, nothing more obscure than public opinion, nothing more deceptive than the whole political system.
-- Cicero
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME