That's fine. I agree with that. Only there are people who actually do hate Jews, or perhaps hold prejudices that are somewhat more genteel, but are still prejudices, who express their prejudice through criticism of Israel. That is not to say that criticism of Israel is invalid, only that not everyone who is criticizing is doing it for noble reasons. Is this really that hard to understand? Triumphant, I do not think you are an antisemite. Period. But I would not be surprised if some of the other people on this thread are. They may not even be aware of how their views are shaped by prejudice. But to my ear the criticism of Israel by certain people on this thread sounds at times so shrill and hysterical that I can't help but wonder what is going on.
whoa..
i disagree. i think you are struggling with different peoples debating styles. . take Byrnzie for example, he is one of the best debators on the board hands down. he sticks to facts and rarely shows emotion.
i think you find it hard to accept that he tears your arguments to pieces and i've a feeling that's what the issue is here. everything you come up with, Byrnzie has an answer for and eventually you have nothing to fight back with other than to try and discredit him in some other way.
that's how it looks to me anyway yosi.
About Byrnzie being a good debater. He isn't. He employs slight of hand. A while back I posted a long article that explained in detail the practical difficulties that faced the IDF fighting in Gaza, those being a dense civilian population, and an enemy that did not wear uniforms and fought from behind and amongst civilians. These all contributed to the high death toll during the Gaza fighting. As I recall Byrnzie never actually dealt with any of the substantive issues raised by the article. He simply posted some quotes that talked about Israel massacring people. That isn't debating, and it certainly isn't tearing my argument to pieces.
did it explain why Israel used white phospherous on these densely populated areas?
i disagree. i think you are struggling with different peoples debating styles. . take Byrnzie for example, he is one of the best debators on the board hands down. he sticks to facts and rarely shows emotion.
i think you find it hard to accept that he tears your arguments to pieces and i've a feeling that's what the issue is here. everything you come up with, Byrnzie has an answer for and eventually you have nothing to fight back with other than to try and discredit him in some other way.
that's how it looks to me anyway yosi.
About Byrnzie being a good debater. He isn't. He employs slight of hand. A while back I posted a long article that explained in detail the practical difficulties that faced the IDF fighting in Gaza, those being a dense civilian population, and an enemy that did not wear uniforms and fought from behind and amongst civilians. These all contributed to the high death toll during the Gaza fighting. As I recall Byrnzie never actually dealt with any of the substantive issues raised by the article. He simply posted some quotes that talked about Israel massacring people. That isn't debating, and it certainly isn't tearing my argument to pieces.
did it explain why Israel used white phospherous on these densely populated areas?
To start with, the IDF had no business being in Gaza. Trying to justify again.
A while back I posted a long article that explained in detail the practical difficulties that faced the IDF fighting in Gaza, those being a dense civilian population, and an enemy that did not wear uniforms and fought from behind and amongst civilians. These all contributed to the high death toll during the Gaza fighting. As I recall Byrnzie never actually dealt with any of the substantive issues raised by the article. He simply posted some quotes that talked about Israel massacring people. That isn't debating, and it certainly isn't tearing my argument to pieces.
This is bullshit. I read the article from start to finish and it contained nothing substantial whatsoever. It simply contained lots of 'What ifs?' and 'Maybes'. You then got upset and went down your usual road of throwing juvenile insults because I'd discredited the only piece of crap you were able to come up with in order to try and defend the massacre of 1000 civilians.
You didn't discredit anything. You did then exactly what you have just done, namely dismiss the article as insubstantial without actually dealing with what it said. It's one thing for you not to address issues when they are raised, but it's quite another to not address the issues and then claim to have done so, and to have done so convincingly.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
You didn't discredit anything. You did then exactly what you have just done, namely dismiss the article as insubstantial without actually dealing with what it said. It's one thing for you not to address issues when they are raised, but it's quite another to not address the issues and then claim to have done so, and to have done so convincingly.
I did address the issues raised in the article. There weren't any. Like I said, it was full of 'maybes' and 'What ifs?'
Why don't you simply find the thread so we can see exactly what was said?
In your seeming desperation to discredit and insult me, you seem to be making a fool of yourself. Maybe you should try another tactic instead? Like sticking to the thread topic and to the facts, for example?
You're one to talk about facts. You have no response to the facts presented on 242 other than to blindly insist that you're right and facts be damned, not to mention the fact that your main mode of argument is to post the OPINIONS of others, and then claim them to be facts.
you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane
You're one to talk about facts. You have no response to the facts presented on 242 other than to blindly insist that you're right and facts be damned, not to mention the fact that your main mode of argument is to post the OPINIONS of others, and then claim them to be facts.
What 'opinions of others' are you referring to exactly? Are you perhaps referring to the U.N 242 vote count in 2005 that I posted courtesy of Norman Finkelstein? That's wasn't opinion. It was fact.
Or maybe you're referring to the facts of the founding of Zionism and of the meaning of Israel's ethnic Nationalism which I posted courtesy of Michael Neumann? In that article he quotes Zionist sources in order to arrive at his conclusions, just as in his book 'The Case Against Israel' he relies exclusively on Israeli sources and documents to support his arguments. This source material isn't opinion, it's fact. Facts that can be checked against the historical record.
And as for Hamas fighters hiding behind civilians and using human shields e.t.c. The U.N Goldstone report found no evidence of that at all.
You seem to be saying that when Israel bombarded a densely populated city using warships, F16's, Apache helicopters, tanks, and white phosphorous shells, that it was the fault of Hamas that civilians were killed.
Well, I'm not buying it. The Israeli leadership should be sent to the Hague to face war crimes charges.
I'm curious, how the fuck can Hamas or Hezbollah "wipe Israel out?" seriously, how is this possible. Hamas can't even fucken bring crayons into gaza but they want to destroy and wipe out Israel? That's complete bull shit. It's so funny how the media and the US double talk. Anyone with an average iq can tell that when they, Hezbollah or Hamas, say they want to "wipe out" Israel off the map, they mean that it doesn't belong on the map. It's Palestine not Israel. They dnt mean to physically wipe it out cuz that shits impossible. Wake up people. Fuck are there that many ignorant morons out there. I'm beginning to think there is. And shit I've noticed that the sheep population is rising real fast in the world.
I'm curious, how the fuck can Hamas or Hezbollah "wipe Israel out?" seriously, how is this possible. Hamas can't even fucken bring crayons into gaza but they want to destroy and wipe out Israel? That's complete bull shit. It's so funny how the media and the US double talk. Anyone with an average iq can tell that when they, Hezbollah or Hamas, say they want to "wipe out" Israel off the map, they mean that it doesn't belong on the map. It's Palestine not Israel. They dnt mean to physically wipe it out cuz that shits impossible. Wake up people. Fuck are there that many ignorant morons out there. I'm beginning to think there is. And shit I've noticed that the sheep population is rising real fast in the world.
You calling people in this thread ignorant morons? If not, who are you talking about?
About Byrnzie being a good debater. He isn't. He employs slight of hand. A while back I posted a long article that explained in detail the practical difficulties that faced the IDF fighting in Gaza, those being a dense civilian population, and an enemy that did not wear uniforms and fought from behind and amongst civilians. These all contributed to the high death toll during the Gaza fighting. As I recall Byrnzie never actually dealt with any of the substantive issues raised by the article. He simply posted some quotes that talked about Israel massacring people. That isn't debating, and it certainly isn't tearing my argument to pieces.
I have been trying to find evidence of yosi's argument "being torn to pieces" and I haven't found much. And if being a good debater means finding massive lists of quotes to spit back, then yes, he's an Olympic-level champion. If it means persuasiveness and logical reasoning ability, he's no better than anyone else here.
"...Dimitri...He talks to me...'.."The Ghost of Greece..".
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
I have been trying to find evidence of yosi's argument "being torn to pieces" and I haven't found much. And if being a good debater means finding massive lists of quotes to spit back, then yes, he's an Olympic-level champion. If it means persuasiveness and logical reasoning ability, he's no better than anyone else here.
Anytime you have something to add to the debate feel free to let us know.
I have been trying to find evidence of yosi's argument "being torn to pieces" and I haven't found much. And if being a good debater means finding massive lists of quotes to spit back, then yes, he's an Olympic-level champion. If it means persuasiveness and logical reasoning ability, he's no better than anyone else here.
Anytime you have something to add to the debate feel free to let us know.
Because we've never been down that particular road ...
Wow there buddy, did I tickle a nerve in u?? Hmmm, I would say if u are offended or feel I touch a nerve, then yes buddy I'll stand by what I said, you're a moron or was it a fucking moron?? Whichever one it is...I guess u want to get into a pissing match ey??? Go ahead there tiger, take your piss now.....
Wow there buddy, did I tickle a nerve in u?? Hmmm, I would say if u are offended or feel I touch a nerve, then yes buddy I'll stand by what I said, you're a moron or was it a fucking moron?? Whichever one it is...I guess u want to get into a pissing match ey??? Go ahead there tiger, take your piss now.....
It was a simple question, I am actually surprised you were able to answer it. Thanks!
I have been trying to find evidence of yosi's argument "being torn to pieces" and I haven't found much. And if being a good debater means finding massive lists of quotes to spit back, then yes, he's an Olympic-level champion. If it means persuasiveness and logical reasoning ability, he's no better than anyone else here.
Anytime you have something to add to the debate feel free to let us know.
Because we've never been down that particular road ...
You have plenty to say about individuals on this board, but I've heard very little of anything else from you. Maybe you should take some time out from stroking Yosi and instead add something constructive to the debate all by yourself?
Wow there buddy, did I tickle a nerve in u?? Hmmm, I would say if u are offended or feel I touch a nerve, then yes buddy I'll stand by what I said, you're a moron or was it a fucking moron?? Whichever one it is...I guess u want to get into a pissing match ey??? Go ahead there tiger, take your piss now.....
It was a simple question, I am actually surprised you were able to answer it. Thanks!
open your eyes bro, read between the lines. Stop living in a dillusional world. What are you afraid of? Knowing the truth??? Wow.....
Wow there buddy, did I tickle a nerve in u?? Hmmm, I would say if u are offended or feel I touch a nerve, then yes buddy I'll stand by what I said, you're a moron or was it a fucking moron?? Whichever one it is...I guess u want to get into a pissing match ey??? Go ahead there tiger, take your piss now.....
It was a simple question, I am actually surprised you were able to answer it. Thanks!
open your eyes bro, read between the lines. Stop living in a dillusional world. What are you afraid of? Knowing the truth??? Wow.....
I am not dillusional. I obviously do have some opinions that differ from yours, although its a tad hard to know what world view you espouse a lot of the time. Are you saying that there can be no real way that Palestinians themselves can commit to peace? Because that's what I was getting at earlier. I am trying to understand the view that the peace process is 100% about Israels' commitments.
Comments
did it explain why Israel used white phospherous on these densely populated areas?
To start with, the IDF had no business being in Gaza. Trying to justify again.
This is bullshit. I read the article from start to finish and it contained nothing substantial whatsoever. It simply contained lots of 'What ifs?' and 'Maybes'. You then got upset and went down your usual road of throwing juvenile insults because I'd discredited the only piece of crap you were able to come up with in order to try and defend the massacre of 1000 civilians.
I did address the issues raised in the article. There weren't any. Like I said, it was full of 'maybes' and 'What ifs?'
Why don't you simply find the thread so we can see exactly what was said?
In your seeming desperation to discredit and insult me, you seem to be making a fool of yourself. Maybe you should try another tactic instead? Like sticking to the thread topic and to the facts, for example?
What 'opinions of others' are you referring to exactly? Are you perhaps referring to the U.N 242 vote count in 2005 that I posted courtesy of Norman Finkelstein? That's wasn't opinion. It was fact.
Or maybe you're referring to the facts of the founding of Zionism and of the meaning of Israel's ethnic Nationalism which I posted courtesy of Michael Neumann? In that article he quotes Zionist sources in order to arrive at his conclusions, just as in his book 'The Case Against Israel' he relies exclusively on Israeli sources and documents to support his arguments. This source material isn't opinion, it's fact. Facts that can be checked against the historical record.
And as for Hamas fighters hiding behind civilians and using human shields e.t.c. The U.N Goldstone report found no evidence of that at all.
You seem to be saying that when Israel bombarded a densely populated city using warships, F16's, Apache helicopters, tanks, and white phosphorous shells, that it was the fault of Hamas that civilians were killed.
Well, I'm not buying it. The Israeli leadership should be sent to the Hague to face war crimes charges.
You calling people in this thread ignorant morons? If not, who are you talking about?
I have been trying to find evidence of yosi's argument "being torn to pieces" and I haven't found much. And if being a good debater means finding massive lists of quotes to spit back, then yes, he's an Olympic-level champion. If it means persuasiveness and logical reasoning ability, he's no better than anyone else here.
Israel could fight 3 simultaneous wars against Syria, Lebanon and Palestine right now and win all 3 handedly
First off, I agree, and secondly, that wasn't my question.
"..That's One Happy Fuckin Ghost.."
“..That came up on the Pillow Case...This is for the Greek, With Our Apologies.....”
Anytime you have something to add to the debate feel free to let us know.
Because we've never been down that particular road ...
It was a simple question, I am actually surprised you were able to answer it. Thanks!
You have plenty to say about individuals on this board, but I've heard very little of anything else from you. Maybe you should take some time out from stroking Yosi and instead add something constructive to the debate all by yourself?
open your eyes bro, read between the lines. Stop living in a dillusional world. What are you afraid of? Knowing the truth??? Wow.....
I am not dillusional. I obviously do have some opinions that differ from yours, although its a tad hard to know what world view you espouse a lot of the time. Are you saying that there can be no real way that Palestinians themselves can commit to peace? Because that's what I was getting at earlier. I am trying to understand the view that the peace process is 100% about Israels' commitments.