Imagine That -- I’m Still Anti-War

1…5556586061…90

Comments

  • benjs
    benjs Toronto, ON Posts: 9,394
    PJ_Soul said:

    I seriously doubt that a cease-fire could possibly include Israel ceasing the destruction of tunnels that are within their territory.

    That depends whether they're destroying them from the Palestinian side or the Israeli side. That's something I really don't understand actually - a tunnel spans from Israeli land to Palestinian land, and yet in the interest of peace Israel destroys them from the Palestinian side, forcing armed Israelis to go into what they claim are incredibly hostile territories? Seems a bit strange.
    '05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2

    EV
    Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
  • dankind
    dankind Posts: 20,841
    benjs said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    I seriously doubt that a cease-fire could possibly include Israel ceasing the destruction of tunnels that are within their territory.

    That depends whether they're destroying them from the Palestinian side or the Israeli side. That's something I really don't understand actually - a tunnel spans from Israeli land to Palestinian land, and yet in the interest of peace Israel destroys them from the Palestinian side, forcing armed Israelis to go into what they claim are incredibly hostile territories? Seems a bit strange.
    The terms were that Israel would still be destroying the tunnels during the cease-fire.
    I SAW PEARL JAM
  • brianlux
    brianlux Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 43,674
    dankind said:

    With all due respect to Brian et al. who are trying to steer this thread into a thread for peace, I might be splitting hairs, but the title of this thread and Eddie Vedder's letter is "Imagine That -- I'm Still Anti-War." It is not "Imagine That -- I'm Preaching Peace."

    Taken alone "anti" connotes a certain fierceness (an affectation that has often been attributed to the lyrical and vocal stylings of Eddie Vedder). According to merriam-webster.com, anti = one that is opposed.

    And what I've read here is, for the most part, just that -- the fierce opinions of those who are opposed to war/institutional violence. Of course, as with any discussion in which there are multiple points of view, the debate can sometimes get personal due to the passionate positions of the participants. But I like to think that all of us are plenty thick-skinned enough to ignore that noise and get back to the topic at hand -- namely, opposing war. I haven't seen anything that has seemed willfully malicious, just fiery and at times dumb and reactionary -- and we've all been there (no offense meant).

    Pro-peace is the complementary, or perhaps supplementary, side of being anti-war, but they are not one and the same.

    "I myself once dabbled in pacifism," so if you want to start a thread somewhere with the objective of promoting peace, by all means, please do so (and pm me the link so that I might participate), but this ain't that thread. This is a thread for those who are ANTI-war.

    That being said: As-salaam alaikum.

    You may indeed be splitting hairs here, dankind- Peace and anti-war are basically the same thing in my mind- but not matter. What I got out of Ed's message is that he is saying that despite all the horrors he is still anti-war and hopes somehow people will learn to work together. Those sentiments seemed to be mostly ignored on this thread so either I am totally missing the point or the thread has gone awry. Either way, my voice seems to be one taken here as contentious so I will gracefully bow out now and wish you all a good weekend.
    "It's a sad and beautiful world"
    -Roberto Benigni

  • dankind
    dankind Posts: 20,841
    brianlux said:

    dankind said:

    With all due respect to Brian et al. who are trying to steer this thread into a thread for peace, I might be splitting hairs, but the title of this thread and Eddie Vedder's letter is "Imagine That -- I'm Still Anti-War." It is not "Imagine That -- I'm Preaching Peace."

    Taken alone "anti" connotes a certain fierceness (an affectation that has often been attributed to the lyrical and vocal stylings of Eddie Vedder). According to merriam-webster.com, anti = one that is opposed.

    And what I've read here is, for the most part, just that -- the fierce opinions of those who are opposed to war/institutional violence. Of course, as with any discussion in which there are multiple points of view, the debate can sometimes get personal due to the passionate positions of the participants. But I like to think that all of us are plenty thick-skinned enough to ignore that noise and get back to the topic at hand -- namely, opposing war. I haven't seen anything that has seemed willfully malicious, just fiery and at times dumb and reactionary -- and we've all been there (no offense meant).

    Pro-peace is the complementary, or perhaps supplementary, side of being anti-war, but they are not one and the same.

    "I myself once dabbled in pacifism," so if you want to start a thread somewhere with the objective of promoting peace, by all means, please do so (and pm me the link so that I might participate), but this ain't that thread. This is a thread for those who are ANTI-war.

    That being said: As-salaam alaikum.

    You may indeed be splitting hairs here, dankind- Peace and anti-war are basically the same thing in my mind- but not matter. What I got out of Ed's message is that he is saying that despite all the horrors he is still anti-war and hopes somehow people will learn to work together. Those sentiments seemed to be mostly ignored on this thread so either I am totally missing the point or the thread has gone awry. Either way, my voice seems to be one taken here as contentious so I will gracefully bow out now and wish you all a good weekend.
    You may be right. I'm an editor by trade, so splitting hairs is in my nature. And if your voice has been taken here as contentious or even if that is just your perception -- I only add that latter clause because as an outsider who has mostly just read through this thread (every single post), I haven't observed as much -- then that is truly sad.

    All you are saying is give peace a chance.
    I SAW PEARL JAM
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,760
    brianlux said:

    dankind said:

    With all due respect to Brian et al. who are trying to steer this thread into a thread for peace, I might be splitting hairs, but the title of this thread and Eddie Vedder's letter is "Imagine That -- I'm Still Anti-War." It is not "Imagine That -- I'm Preaching Peace."

    Taken alone "anti" connotes a certain fierceness (an affectation that has often been attributed to the lyrical and vocal stylings of Eddie Vedder). According to merriam-webster.com, anti = one that is opposed.

    And what I've read here is, for the most part, just that -- the fierce opinions of those who are opposed to war/institutional violence. Of course, as with any discussion in which there are multiple points of view, the debate can sometimes get personal due to the passionate positions of the participants. But I like to think that all of us are plenty thick-skinned enough to ignore that noise and get back to the topic at hand -- namely, opposing war. I haven't seen anything that has seemed willfully malicious, just fiery and at times dumb and reactionary -- and we've all been there (no offense meant).

    Pro-peace is the complementary, or perhaps supplementary, side of being anti-war, but they are not one and the same.

    "I myself once dabbled in pacifism," so if you want to start a thread somewhere with the objective of promoting peace, by all means, please do so (and pm me the link so that I might participate), but this ain't that thread. This is a thread for those who are ANTI-war.

    That being said: As-salaam alaikum.

    You may indeed be splitting hairs here, dankind- Peace and anti-war are basically the same thing in my mind- but not matter. What I got out of Ed's message is that he is saying that despite all the horrors he is still anti-war and hopes somehow people will learn to work together. Those sentiments seemed to be mostly ignored on this thread so either I am totally missing the point or the thread has gone awry. Either way, my voice seems to be one taken here as contentious so I will gracefully bow out now and wish you all a good weekend.
    Brian, I just think that Eddie was talking about actual war, and finding peace in bad situations where people are getting killed. I find it absolutely impossible to believe that he also meant that people shouldn't argue with one another when they disagree on a message board. I don't think anyone is ignoring what Eddie said in this thread. Everyone is debating the issues when it comes to a situation where peace is not being found. The one common sentiment here is that we all want peace in the world, and in Gaza in particular. That seems to be right in line with Eddie's message, no?
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    #ProtectGaza let's get it trending!
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    Genocide

  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,760
    edited August 2014
    ^^^^ What exactly is the point of that? Do we have some reason to believe that the Israeli government is using this quote in their mission statement? I'm not sure it's useful or productive to be posting ancient scripture here, as though it proves something. We could just just as easily do the same thing in terms of Muslims, taking quotes from their religious text (which is, in fact, more likely).
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,760
    edited August 2014
    ^^^^ Again, the point? This is from an Oped blog. How exactly is it relevant to the Israeli government's plans? If a member of the government said that, then this would mean something.
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    PJ_Soul said:

    ^^^^ What exactly is the point of that? Do we have some reason to believe that the Israeli government is using this quote in their mission statement? I'm not sure it's useful or productive to be posting ancient scripture here, as though it proves something. We could just just as easily do the same thing in terms of Muslims, taking quotes from their religious text (which is, in fact, more likely).

    Um, that tweet is from a Jewish blogger. And not for nothing but it has.
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,760
    edited August 2014
    badbrains said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    ^^^^ What exactly is the point of that? Do we have some reason to believe that the Israeli government is using this quote in their mission statement? I'm not sure it's useful or productive to be posting ancient scripture here, as though it proves something. We could just just as easily do the same thing in terms of Muslims, taking quotes from their religious text (which is, in fact, more likely).

    Um, that tweet is from a Jewish blogger. And not for nothing but it has.
    I had already assumed that tweet was from a Jewish blogger.... :-/

    And what has? The Israeli government has stated that their mission is to wipe out every Palestinian and their livestock? Can you post an official source for that? If that were their actual goal wouldn't they have done it already?
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
  • badbrains
    badbrains Posts: 10,255
    PJ_Soul said:

    badbrains said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    ^^^^ What exactly is the point of that? Do we have some reason to believe that the Israeli government is using this quote in their mission statement? I'm not sure it's useful or productive to be posting ancient scripture here, as though it proves something. We could just just as easily do the same thing in terms of Muslims, taking quotes from their religious text (which is, in fact, more likely).

    Um, that tweet is from a Jewish blogger. And not for nothing but it has.
    I had already assumed that tweet was from a Jewish blogger.... :-/

    And what has? The Israeli government has stated that their mission is to wipe out every Palestinian and their livestock? Can you post an official source for that? If that were their actual goal wouldn't they have done it already?
    Sorry
  • backseatLover12
    backseatLover12 Posts: 2,312
    Byrnzie said:

    Nobody was trying to silence the 'flower-power' crowd. In fact, the complete opposite was the case. They all jumped on my 'anger' at the atrocities taking place, and my anger at those trying to excuse and justify it, and tried pretending that those who are actively trying to do someone about the massacre over there - by whatever means they have at their disposal - have emotional issues, and should basically shut up and puff on a bong.


    For that last time, since the beginning, this thread is not about fighting. It's about peace. How many times does this have to be written
    Byrnzie said:

    Spags said:

    3 day peace is on.

    It didn't last long apparently:

    http://www.worldbulletin.net/haberler/141712/israeli-tank-fire-kills-4-after-truce-begins?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

    World Bulletin/News Desk

    Israeli tanks opened fire in the southern Gaza Strip after a 72-hour truce began on Friday, a Reuters photographer and the Palestinian Interior Ministry said, and Hamas media reported that four people were killed.

    The Israeli military had no immediate comment.

    brianlux said:

    dankind said:

    With all due respect to Brian et al. who are trying to steer this thread into a thread for peace, I might be splitting hairs, but the title of this thread and Eddie Vedder's letter is "Imagine That -- I'm Still Anti-War." It is not "Imagine That -- I'm Preaching Peace."

    Taken alone "anti" connotes a certain fierceness (an affectation that has often been attributed to the lyrical and vocal stylings of Eddie Vedder). According to merriam-webster.com, anti = one that is opposed.

    And what I've read here is, for the most part, just that -- the fierce opinions of those who are opposed to war/institutional violence. Of course, as with any discussion in which there are multiple points of view, the debate can sometimes get personal due to the passionate positions of the participants. But I like to think that all of us are plenty thick-skinned enough to ignore that noise and get back to the topic at hand -- namely, opposing war. I haven't seen anything that has seemed willfully malicious, just fiery and at times dumb and reactionary -- and we've all been there (no offense meant).

    Pro-peace is the complementary, or perhaps supplementary, side of being anti-war, but they are not one and the same.

    "I myself once dabbled in pacifism," so if you want to start a thread somewhere with the objective of promoting peace, by all means, please do so (and pm me the link so that I might participate), but this ain't that thread. This is a thread for those who are ANTI-war.

    That being said: As-salaam alaikum.

    You may indeed be splitting hairs here, dankind- Peace and anti-war are basically the same thing in my mind- but not matter. What I got out of Ed's message is that he is saying that despite all the horrors he is still anti-war and hopes somehow people will learn to work together. Those sentiments seemed to be mostly ignored on this thread so either I am totally missing the point or the thread has gone awry. Either way, my voice seems to be one taken here as contentious so I will gracefully bow out now and wish you all a good weekend.
    It's interesting. People are fully geared to react to a reading piece already ammo'd with their response. Nothing is taken in, it's all just getting ready to be spewed out, because nothing is learned. We see what we want to see. Dankind sees "anti-war" not as peace, but against war. You and I, Brian, know that anti-war is peace. People like Byrnzie don't even read anything pertaining to peace. We're just all ready to react.

    I'm done.
  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    dankind said:

    With all due respect to Brian et al. who are trying to steer this thread into a thread for peace, I might be splitting hairs, but the title of this thread and Eddie Vedder's letter is "Imagine That -- I'm Still Anti-War." It is not "Imagine That -- I'm Preaching Peace."

    Taken alone "anti" connotes a certain fierceness (an affectation that has often been attributed to the lyrical and vocal stylings of Eddie Vedder). According to merriam-webster.com, anti = one that is opposed.

    And what I've read here is, for the most part, just that -- the fierce opinions of those who are opposed to war/institutional violence. Of course, as with any discussion in which there are multiple points of view, the debate can sometimes get personal due to the passionate positions of the participants. But I like to think that all of us are plenty thick-skinned enough to ignore that noise and get back to the topic at hand -- namely, opposing war. I haven't seen anything that has seemed willfully malicious, just fiery and at times dumb and reactionary -- and we've all been there (no offense meant).

    Pro-peace is the complementary, or perhaps supplementary, side of being anti-war, but they are not one and the same.

    "I myself once dabbled in pacifism," so if you want to start a thread somewhere with the objective of promoting peace, by all means, please do so (and pm me the link so that I might participate), but this ain't that thread. This is a thread for those who are ANTI-war.

    That being said: As-salaam alaikum.


    Great post.

  • dignin
    dignin Posts: 9,478
    PJ_Soul said:

    brianlux said:

    dankind said:

    With all due respect to Brian et al. who are trying to steer this thread into a thread for peace, I might be splitting hairs, but the title of this thread and Eddie Vedder's letter is "Imagine That -- I'm Still Anti-War." It is not "Imagine That -- I'm Preaching Peace."

    Taken alone "anti" connotes a certain fierceness (an affectation that has often been attributed to the lyrical and vocal stylings of Eddie Vedder). According to merriam-webster.com, anti = one that is opposed.

    And what I've read here is, for the most part, just that -- the fierce opinions of those who are opposed to war/institutional violence. Of course, as with any discussion in which there are multiple points of view, the debate can sometimes get personal due to the passionate positions of the participants. But I like to think that all of us are plenty thick-skinned enough to ignore that noise and get back to the topic at hand -- namely, opposing war. I haven't seen anything that has seemed willfully malicious, just fiery and at times dumb and reactionary -- and we've all been there (no offense meant).

    Pro-peace is the complementary, or perhaps supplementary, side of being anti-war, but they are not one and the same.

    "I myself once dabbled in pacifism," so if you want to start a thread somewhere with the objective of promoting peace, by all means, please do so (and pm me the link so that I might participate), but this ain't that thread. This is a thread for those who are ANTI-war.

    That being said: As-salaam alaikum.

    You may indeed be splitting hairs here, dankind- Peace and anti-war are basically the same thing in my mind- but not matter. What I got out of Ed's message is that he is saying that despite all the horrors he is still anti-war and hopes somehow people will learn to work together. Those sentiments seemed to be mostly ignored on this thread so either I am totally missing the point or the thread has gone awry. Either way, my voice seems to be one taken here as contentious so I will gracefully bow out now and wish you all a good weekend.
    Brian, I just think that Eddie was talking about actual war, and finding peace in bad situations where people are getting killed. I find it absolutely impossible to believe that he also meant that people shouldn't argue with one another when they disagree on a message board. I don't think anyone is ignoring what Eddie said in this thread. Everyone is debating the issues when it comes to a situation where peace is not being found. The one common sentiment here is that we all want peace in the world, and in Gaza in particular. That seems to be right in line with Eddie's message, no?
    Another good post

  • backseatLover12
    backseatLover12 Posts: 2,312
    dankind said:

    With all due respect to Brian et al. who are trying to steer this thread into a thread for peace, I might be splitting hairs, but the title of this thread and Eddie Vedder's letter is "Imagine That -- I'm Still Anti-War." It is not "Imagine That -- I'm Preaching Peace."

    Taken alone "anti" connotes a certain fierceness (an affectation that has often been attributed to the lyrical and vocal stylings of Eddie Vedder). According to merriam-webster.com, anti = one that is opposed.

    And what I've read here is, for the most part, just that -- the fierce opinions of those who are opposed to war/institutional violence. Of course, as with any discussion in which there are multiple points of view, the debate can sometimes get personal due to the passionate positions of the participants. But I like to think that all of us are plenty thick-skinned enough to ignore that noise and get back to the topic at hand -- namely, opposing war. I haven't seen anything that has seemed willfully malicious, just fiery and at times dumb and reactionary -- and we've all been there (no offense meant).

    Pro-peace is the complementary, or perhaps supplementary, side of being anti-war, but they are not one and the same.

    "I myself once dabbled in pacifism," so if you want to start a thread somewhere with the objective of promoting peace, by all means, please do so (and pm me the link so that I might participate), but this ain't that thread. This is a thread for those who are ANTI-war.

    That being said: As-salaam alaikum.



    Anti-war is against war. The opposite of war is peace. It doesn't get any simpler than that.

  • hedonist
    hedonist Posts: 24,524
    backseatLover12 said:


    It's interesting. People are fully geared to react to a reading piece already ammo'd with their response. Nothing is taken in, it's all just getting ready to be spewed out, because nothing is learned. We see what we want to see. Dankind sees "anti-war" not as peace, but against war. You and I, Brian, know that anti-war is peace. People like Byrnzie don't even read anything pertaining to peace. We're just all ready to react.

    I'm done.

    Since we're talking about good posts, I'd put this in there with the rest of them.

    The reactionary comment is, for the most part, spot on. I've done it myself, both here and "out there"...and non-exclusively to this subject, I really try to keep my mind and eyes open - not easy though, especially when heated.

  • fuck
    fuck Posts: 4,069
    EdsonNascimento said:

    I think my favorite part of this and similar threads is that if you don't agree with me you're caving to propaganda, but what I post is definitely not propaganda especially if I post it over and over again.

    Note: I am personally not calling anyone's posting propaganda. Just citing the

    PJ_Soul said:

    Byrnzie said:

    Spags said:

    3 day peace is on.

    It didn't last long apparently:

    http://www.worldbulletin.net/haberler/141712/israeli-tank-fire-kills-4-after-truce-begins?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

    World Bulletin/News Desk

    Israeli tanks opened fire in the southern Gaza Strip after a 72-hour truce began on Friday, a Reuters photographer and the Palestinian Interior Ministry said, and Hamas media reported that four people were killed.

    The Israeli military had no immediate comment.

    Sounds to me like it was Hamas who broke the cease fire.
    It was. While the Israeli soldiers were seeking out to destroy the terror tunnels, a suicide bomber killed 2 soldiers and possibly the same or separate incident another soldier was taken hostage minutes after the cease fire.

    John Kerry (and others) are calling for the unconditional return of the soldier captured to effectively break the terms of the cease fire.

    But, don't worry - that will be dismissed a propaganda because it doesn't fit with a certain world view.
    This is a lie. You're lying. A "suicide bomber"?? There hasn't been a Hamas suicide bomber since they renounced suicide bombing, like a decade ago! Have you forgotten what the Israeli lie is for this long?

    Everyone else, Watch and learn: http://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/gaza-cease-fire-implodes-after-attack-314229315859

    It is clear from all the reports I've gotten on the ground that Israel murdered Palestinians in Rafah first.
This discussion has been closed.

Categories