Just the facts please.... Israel/Lebanon

Commy · July 2006

NMyTree wrote:

Simply, it was inaccurate and heavily tipped against Israel. You made it a point to tip the scales and make Israel out to be the sole villans in all this.

for the last 10 years the ratio of palestinian civilian casualties to Israeli has been 5 to 1. I'm not being one sided here...Israel has been more aggresive towards the palestinians. That's just reality...the facts support that statement. They have the most powerful military in the world giving them $2 billion in military aid every year...and they use it.

You're not an objective person. You're posts routinely tip in one direction...and one direction only. You hardly ever point out fault any where else but the US and Israel. You're really no different than Miller, except, you tip the scales to the opposite side.

thanks for that personal critique, it really means a lot to me.

The problems in the Middle East have been going on for so very long. All parties are guilty of ......everything. What started this recent eruption of violence was not started just this week. You'd have to be sadly short-sighted, ill-informed or simply biased to believe so.

the ratio of palestinian to israeli casualties used to be 50 to 1...When Israel attacks they kill without remorse...they are a military might in the region and they've been consistantly trying to oppress and control the palestinian people. This is evident in every so called peace proposal that Israel has offered, every military move Israel has launched, and when they built the fence-and so on and so on.

Whether you believe me or not, I'm really not trying to get personal or insult you. I'm speaking of your posting habits and the content of your posts.

Again, thanks for the personal critique.

I just wanted it all to end. I'm sick of this Middle East crap and all the men, women and children being killed, from all sides.

For it to end Israel really needs to step up and offer the Palestinians a state, an equal status, and they need to stop taking their land.

But I know that all sides involved here have been clawing and biting at each other, for quite some time. They 've been chipping away and throwing jabs. Finally, the boxers started throwing haymakers.

The boxers haven't been holding their punchesl...67, 72, 80, 90's, into 2000, Israel has pursued a consistant aggressive policy towards the palestinians.

Pointing fingers and taking sides is what they want us to do. They want us to get ourselves all riled up.

well alright.

We need to keep our eyes open and pay attention, because the next few days and the next two weeks will be important. Especailly, we need to keep an eye on our slimey administration and what they are doing, during this time. Those weasels are likely to try and pull one past us.

I agree, they are weasles. They've been pulling one past us for decades now...and with $2 billion a year in military aid to Israel its really quite obvious that the Israelis are the aggressors now, have been in the past, and will continue to pursue their constant policy towards the Palestinians unless we force our leaders to put an end to it all. It really is up to the US authority, they can end this violence at any time...and it starts by treating the palestinian people with respect and by giving them a state worth something. Israel has all the prime agriculture lands, most of the access to the good water supplies, all the pristine land...its give and take, Israel must cede some land here, and the Palestinians must be willing to accept a peaceful offer-if it truly recognizes their previous borders and does not separate them-unlike past peace offers-Oslo to name one. Notice you never see maps of these "peace offers" that the 'evil' palestinians turn down. If you did you'd laugh at how rediculous they really were.

melodious · July 2006

mammasan wrote:

Shit it's not about a girl. Here I thought this was about Hassan Nasrallah passing love notes to Olmert's girlfriend in study hall. Thanks for clueing me in on the severity of the situation.

excellent exchange of wit: good comeback....;)

don't really know how to negotiate with irrational leaders, but I do know that escalating this military conflict is not the answer.

mamasan, did i ever apologize for coming on so strongly last spring? i'm sorry; i was clueless. but i wanna say...on this note, i have to agree with you...

Puck78 · July 2006

binauralsounds wrote:

Yes, I'm mortified to see "INNOCENT" civilians killed in ANY conflict/war but unfortunately this thing happens in war.

this is something that you say just because you've never been ina war. Ah: there's also intelligent people that don't say that and have never been to war. You're not in the class of intelligent people, anyway.
Sorry for putting opinions in this thread, back to facts now

einatshaul · July 2006

Commy wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/12/mideast/index.html
http://www.examiner.com/a-161753~Israeli_Planes_Attack_3_Gazaa_Bridges.html

What we know....

Israel has been holding hundreds of Palestinian prisoners-including women and children, for many years.

Hezbollah kidnapped 1 Israeli soldier-to use in a prisoner exchange.

Israel then started a major offensive on Gaza, that has affected tens of thousands of residents, and they seem to be intesifying their assault.

Israel has bombed at least 3 bridges in Gaza-very damaging to a very poor people.

Israel has bombed the Palestinian Airport, a civilian target, grounding all aircraft.

Israel has bombed the power supply for much of Gaza, leaving resident without electricity.

Israel has killed at least 60 innocent civilians as of yesterday, and the palestinains are responsible for around 12 inncocent Israeli civilians.

All of this has been done with tacit support from Washington, as well as with miltary hardware and intel.

It's no use, see how early this thing turned in to personal views? there is no objective truth, it's all on the way you interperet it, this list is Biased from the start. Believe what you want to believe, the world will stay a sad place to live in with so much ignorance.
I'm really sad, you simply will never know what it's like for ANYONE to be born and raised in the Middle East...

binauralsounds · July 2006

Puck78 wrote:

this is something that you say just because you've never been ina war. Ah: there's also intelligent people that don't say that and have never been to war. You're not in the class of intelligent people, anyway.
Sorry for putting opinions in this thread, back to facts now

I've never been in a war??? HAHAHAHAH. ooooooookkkkkkkk. If you say so! Glad you know my background!

Btw... Get away from name calling, might take you more serious. For the record, get your facts STRAIGHT when you say someone has or hasn't been in a war without you even knowing them.

Thank you!

sloanedone · July 2006

OneLove wrote:

Ok folks, lets try to put our personal opinions aside for a moment.

For those of us interested in reading up on the subject, could anyone provide some resources on the net that are reasonably unbiased?

Perhaps we can all learn something new here. Personally, most of what I know I learned watching American news. I can see giant holes in their "truth", as with most subjects.

I have to admit, I feel like a stupid American right now. I'd rather learn as much as I can then spout off my personal feelings, as I sit comfortably on my couch here in the US. Seems like to easy a place to be sitting and making grandeous statements about what should be done or not done.

Frankly, you sound like a "stupid American." Why would you ask for sources of information on THE messiest conflict of our time from a message board stacked with mostly one-sided (in this case, leftist) views? That's not to say the people who suggested CS Monitor, History Channel, and other sources weren't right, but when you ask random people for sources, you're bound to get plenty of biased sources -- in this case from both the left and the right.

Nobody can lie to you if you search out both sides of the argument and make your own decisions.

OneLove · July 2006

sloanedone wrote:

Frankly, you sound like a "stupid American." Why would you ask for sources of information on THE messiest conflict of our time from a message board stacked with mostly one-sided (in this case, leftist) views? That's not to say the people who suggested CS Monitor, History Channel, and other sources weren't right, but when you ask random people for sources, you're bound to get plenty of biased sources -- in this case from both the left and the right.

Nobody can lie to you if you search out both sides of the argument and make your own decisions.

For one, your post is way off base. You make an assumption that I am not capable of sensing a bias in what is by nature a very passionate and devisive debate.

Give people on the board a tiny amount of credit. There are some folks on the board who feel passionately, and who know what they are talking about (on both sides). There are also folks who seem to use the board as a way to badger folks into falling to one side or the other. The difference between the two is apparent.

I believe the truely "Stupid American" thing to do would be to go spouting off about my opinions on the matter when I realize that I have more exploring to do on the subject. I could go off, half cocked, and based on whats cool to say around here, or just to be an antagonist, but instead I would rather educate myself.

Most of the threads on this particular subject have been centered around a relatively few members reactions to events. I hadn't seen any links posted for folks to get at any sort of historical facts, or present factual information. I would argue that nearly all information on the subject is biased. Perhaps there are other folks here who, like myself would like to understand the conflict better, rather than jumping on spirited debates where folks clearly have set opinions.

Commy · July 2006

einatshaul wrote:

It's no use, see how early this thing turned in to personal views? there is no objective truth, it's all on the way you interperet it, this list is Biased from the start. Believe what you want to believe, the world will stay a sad place to live in with so much ignorance.
I'm really sad, you simply will never know what it's like for ANYONE to be born and raised in the Middle East...

Facts are what they are...they aren't opinions, they are not open for debate, they are simply facts. Like Reagan said, "facts are annoying things". Or maybe it was Bush I. When they don't fit a person's view of reality they tend to dismiss them. And if you don't like what took place that's fine, but these things did happen. Right? Can you deny that these events took place? Was I wrong in any event that I described? Have I made any ANY false statements?

Commy · July 2006

PaperPlates wrote:

Bias aside.................can you give a small fraction of an answer? How do you negotiate with madmen? How do you reason with unreasonable men?

And wasn't leaving Gaza a pretty good attempt at placating them? Worked out well so far hasnt it. Next you'll say if we ever find Bin Laden, we should just talk, and not rile up the animals in Al Queda. Sigh.

Obviously you haven't set your bias aside, as you describe these human beings as madmen.

And by the way-they've returned to Gaza, with an army.

Commy · July 2006

einatshaul wrote:

It's no use, see how early this thing turned in to personal views? there is no objective truth, it's all on the way you interperet it, this list is Biased from the start. Believe what you want to believe, the world will stay a sad place to live in with so much ignorance.
I'm really sad, you simply will never know what it's like for ANYONE to be born and raised in the Middle East...

As Noam Chomsky puts it-who's mother is Jewish, called by the New York Times "...the most important intellectual alive,"-

Gaza, itself, the latest phase, began on June 24. It was when Israel abducted two Gaza civilians, a doctor and his brother. We don't know their names. You don't know the names of victims. They were taken to Israel, presumably, and nobody knows their fate. The next day, something happened, which we do know about, a lot. Militants in Gaza, probably Islamic Jihad, abducted an Israeli soldier across the border. That's Corporal Gilad Shalit. And that's well known; first abduction is not. Then followed the escalation of Israeli attacks on Gaza, which I don't have to repeat. It's reported on adequately.

That's how it started, that's simply reality.

rightondude · July 2006

OneLove wrote:

Loved the last paragraph of that post. To be honest, I haven't been around long enough to judge anyone, but I do think if we all keep a level head we may actually learn something new. Even if we don't agree, maybe we'll atleast understand things in a new light.

Did you catch yesterday on TV when Harper and Blair met with the Queen?

I dunno, but I was getting some really creepy vibes from all three of them. I caught it a few times and each time I watched it got worse. They all looked really uncomfortable and nervous.

It also looked very staged and contrived. Harper looked somewhat ashamed, as did Blair, and the Queen didn't know what to do with herself. The body language, the eyes, facial expressions, tone of voice.

I've can't recall ever seeing them act like that before. I dare say they seemed to display guilty conscience.

sloanedone · July 2006

OneLove wrote:

For one, your post is way off base. You make an assumption that I am not capable of sensing a bias in what is by nature a very passionate and devisive debate.

While I wouldn't have put it that harshly, from my initial post it seemed like you were an empty vessel wanting to get filled up with knowledge. I don't know you, but it seems that the first assumption was wrong so I apologize.

OneLove wrote:

Give people on the board a tiny amount of credit. There are some folks on the board who feel passionately, and who know what they are talking about (on both sides). There are also folks who seem to use the board as a way to badger folks into falling to one side or the other. The difference between the two is apparent.

I believe the truely "Stupid American" thing to do would be to go spouting off about my opinions on the matter when I realize that I have more exploring to do on the subject. I could go off, half cocked, and based on whats cool to say around here, or just to be an antagonist, but instead I would rather educate myself.

Most of the threads on this particular subject have been centered around a relatively few members reactions to events. I hadn't seen any links posted for folks to get at any sort of historical facts, or present factual information. I would argue that nearly all information on the subject is biased. Perhaps there are other folks here who, like myself would like to understand the conflict better, rather than jumping on spirited debates where folks clearly have set opinions.

This was my point. You post to a PJ board looking for info on the Middle East and every other guy is going to trot out Chomsky, who is NOT a historian and has -- as any liberal will attest to -- a HUMONGOUS LEFT WING BIAS. Nobody is going to give you objective facts here -- that's the whole point of my post. Go search out the facts yourself.

einatshaul · July 2006

Commy wrote:

Facts are what they are...they aren't opinions, they are not open for debate, they are simply facts. Like Reagan said, "facts are annoying things". Or maybe it was Bush I. When they don't fit a person's view of reality they tend to dismiss them. And if you don't like what took place that's fine, but these things did happen. Right? Can you deny that these events took place? Was I wrong in any event that I described? Have I made any ANY false statements?

Sure, you can tell a list of facts and drop out others, conveniently.

angelica · July 2006

einatshaul wrote:

Sure, you can tell a list of facts and drop out others, conveniently.

I'm literally unaware of all the issues here. Could you please say what facts he is dropping out?

Byrnzie · July 2006

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/07/14/146258

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=107&ItemID=10576

http://www.zmag.org/images/ZLogoArticles2.jpg

http://www.finalcall.com/international/annan_un10-08-2002.htm

http://www.chomsky.info/talks/20010304.htm

http://www.chomsky.info/talks/19990404.htm

angelica · July 2006

Thanks very much for the links, Byrnzie.

einatshaul, I'm still interested in hearing your perspective, and what you have to add that you feel would provide balance to the information Commy has posted. You mentioned Commy dropping out facts. I'd be interested in what facts you refer to.

angelica · July 2006

mammasan wrote:

PaperPlates wrote:

This isnt tiddlywinks. Its not an arument over a girl. There is no "being the bigger man" here.Thats for playground arguments. Unless you mean the one with the bigger guns. Since you acknowledge that neither Syria, nor Iran can or will be "the rational ones"...what is Israel to do? Should they reason with unreasonable men? Should they try to use logic on illogical men? Should they debate with men who refuse debate? Should they???? How exactly do you negotiate or debate or get anywhere with irrational nations???

I don't really know how to negotiate with irrational leaders, but I do know that escalating this military conflict is not the answer.

According to the branch of psychology that is about putting and end to power abuses and imbalances you have hit the nail on the head, mammasan.

Escalation guarantees conflict to continue. Submission does not work either. The solutions lie in the "antithesis":

"Instead, if we don’t want to escalate or submit, we can use an antithesis; a tactical procedure that is used to neutralize (instead of escalating) a power play. The antithesis is a form of verbal martial art which, like Aikido, teaches only defense and knows of no offensive moves."
http://www.claudesteiner.com/osp2.htm

At this point in time, humans choose to go for win/lose, or dominance/submission, etc, and thereby guarantee perpetuation of the cycles.

When we begin to focus on resolution, we will find resolution. In the interim, as long as we avoid our own repressed emotional issues, and blame our emotional lack of skill on someone else, we'll continue to blind ourselves to the solutions we have complete power of.

Byrnzie · July 2006

PaperPlates wrote:

This isnt tiddlywinks. Its not an arument over a girl. There is no "being the bigger man" here.Thats for playground arguments. Unless you mean the one with the bigger guns. Since you acknowledge that neither Syria, nor Iran can or will be "the rational ones"...what is Israel to do? Should they reason with unreasonable men? Should they try to use logic on illogical men? Should they debate with men who refuse debate? Should they???? How exactly do you negotiate or debate or get anywhere with irrational nations???

You make plenty of comments with no basis in reality and with no reference to the facts. You claim that Syria, and Iran are 'irrational'. What a ridiculous statement! Can you please explain what an 'irrational nation' is? And does Israel not qualify as an irrational nation in your scheme of things? A country which is currently defying over 60 U.N resolutions. A country which is carrying out an illegal military occupation. A country which uses excessive force, and kills thousands of civilians every year, in the face of international law. Is Israel a 'rational' country in your estimation?

Byrnzie · July 2006

binauralsounds wrote:

Being "elected" in Iran is like the mass media saying Saddam won by a landslide in the the iraqi election. Secondly, This madman, and that is what he is, WILL wipe them off the map given time. He is simply a mad man

Looks like the media in America are doing a good job of appealing to gullible types like yourself. Yeah, the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a madman. Ooh scary! Kim Jong II is also a madman. So was Sadaam after we spent years supporting him and supplying him weapons. So was Noriega after the U.S supported him for years up until he decided to take control of the Panama canal. So was Gadaffi until your government decided he was our friend again. Osama Bin Laden is also scary!! Oooh sooo scary. He was also our close friend for years whilst fighting the Russians in Afghanistan and until the U.S refused to remove it's bases in Saudi Arabia.
Oh so many scary people all over the world!! Funny how the U.S always needs a scary enemy! And funny how the U.S media finds it so easy to reduce mugs like you to war fevered hysteria.

binauralsounds · July 2006

Byrnzie wrote:

Looks like the media in America are doing a good job of appealing to gullible types like yourself. Yeah, the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is a madman. Ooh scary! Kim Jong II is also a madman. So was Sadaam after we spent years supporting him and supplying him weapons. So was Noriega after the U.S supported him for years up until he decided to take control of the Panama canal. So was Gadaffi until your government decided he was our friend again. Osama Bin Laden is also scary!! Oooh sooo scary. He was also our close friend for years whilst fighting the Russians in Afghanistan and until the U.S refused to remove it's bases in Saudi Arabia.
Oh so many scary people all over the world!! Funny how the U.S always needs a scary enemy! And funny how the U.S media finds it so easy to reduce mugs like you to war fevered hysteria.

I let NO media influence me and see things for what they are! It NEVER ceases to amaze me on here, that when one has a different view from the majority, one is labled "gullible", "mugs", (fill in many other tags here) and a ton of other cop outs. Good try on the gullible tag, but sorry to inform you, it DOES NOT APPLY HERE!

Btw... I pose this to you... Instead of wasting your deep thinking on name calling and labeling, what is YOUR solution to the problem? Mine has been stated before.

Just the facts please.... Israel/Lebanon

Comments

Categories