"who started" is a question, not an answer

Eva7

PaperPlates wrote:

and the fact that she offers well thought out opinions on the articles she quotes, (not this particular time tho)

well, here's my two cents then....
It was soon obvious to me that the actual crisis in Lebanon was well planned, and it is not necessary to read those articles I have linked nor to be familiar with the world politics to state so, but it is enough to look at the military operations being carried out to understand it.
The details about such plans are just being investigated and readily skipped by all the western media, and it is just ironic to me that we would need to know more about it. In the meantime, the massacre in Gaza is being pretty much suppressed. But there are all the elements to judge what is going on, in front of our eyes.
But above all... it is so important what I think, or what you think, or what EK thinks?

PaperPlates

El_Kabong wrote:

how can i be overly judgemental or argumentative or aggressive if i don't offer any opinion and just post a link?

you guys should work on your points, they conflict and contradict each other way too much

And you should read slowly. I said that you tend to be judgemental/aggresive in your PRESENTATION Of the articles. Nothing I said contradicted anything, other than you're not too accurate picture of yourself in your mind. My 2 cents. You asked.

farfromglorified

"The Israelis tend to launch their wars of choice in the summer, in part because they know that European and American universities will be the primary nodes of popular opposition, and the universities are out in the summer."

Is that a joke?


Anywho, while a lot of these articles seem a bit long on circumstance and hindsight, I don't think any of them are terribly off kilter. I'm a bit confused by the accusations, however. Eva, do you think that preplanning this signifies something nefarious? Taking into account everything we know about the conflict, are you surprised that Israel has these kind of plans?

farfromglorified

El_Kabong wrote:

i wonder why eva doesn't get criticized for posting links like some like to do to others? odd, that...

Probably because this thread is not sarcastically titled "those poor israeli victims". And probably because the first line in the post is "Just a few articles that pose the doubt", rather than something like "Dick Cheney schemes to kill babies".

Eva7

farfromglorified wrote:

"The Israelis tend to launch their wars of choice in the summer, in part because they know that European and American universities will be the primary nodes of popular opposition, and the universities are out in the summer."

Is that a joke?


Anywho, while a lot of these articles seem a bit long on circumstance and hindsight, I don't think any of them are terribly off kilter. I'm a bit confused by the accusations, however. Eva, do you think that preplanning this signifies something nefarious? Taking into account everything we know about the conflict, are you surprised that Israel has these kind of plans?

I never was surprised. Such new conflict with Lebanon was easily foreseen. Preplanning is nefarious only considering the fact that they (Israel, the US, the western politicians and media) tell a different version.

Eva7

farfromglorified wrote:

Probably because this thread is not sarcastically titled "those poor israeli victims". And probably because the first line in the post is "Just a few articles that pose the doubt", rather than something like "Dick Cheney schemes to kill babies".

do you mean that people get usually deceived by the form and do not pay attention to the substabce? you could be right then.

El_Kabong

farfromglorified wrote:

Probably because this thread is not sarcastically titled "those poor israeli victims". And probably because the first line in the post is "Just a few articles that pose the doubt", rather than something like "Dick Cheney schemes to kill babies".

that is 1 thread title out of how many? never had anything close to the cheney schemes to kill babies, tho...also, the complaint was lobed before that one...but it was nice in theory

farfromglorified

Eva7 wrote:

do you mean that people get usually deceived by the form and do not pay attention to the substabce? you could be right then.

That's pretty much what I'm saying. To pose a question in the form of a question is honest. To pose a question in the form of an answer is dishonest. And people are going to call out that dishonesty, regardless of the substance.

farfromglorified

El_Kabong wrote:

that is 1 thread title out of how many? never had anything close to the cheney schemes to kill babies, tho...also, the complaint was lobed before that one...but it was nice in theory

I don't even know what complaint you're talking about. I'm only speaking to my own reactions to the situations you described. If Eva would have said something like "it's obvious that Dick Cheney is behind this conflict" or "Israel was just looking for an opportunity to kill Lebanese civilians" and then, when challenged, claimed that she was only trying to "educate", I would take similar issue.

farfromglorified

Eva7 wrote:

I never was surprised. Such new conflict with Lebanon was easily foreseen. Preplanning is nefarious only considering the fact that they (Israel, the US, the western politicians and media) tell a different version.

That's fair. But I'm not sure how different that version is. Just because there were plans in place does not mean that this war was unprovocated -- such plans cannot erase or justify the attrocious actions of Hezbollah. Certainly I agree with those who say this war is a disproportional response, but I'm not going to agree that this conflict was strongly desired or engineered.

Eva7

farfromglorified wrote:

That's pretty much what I'm saying. To pose a question in the form of a question is honest. To pose a question in the form of an answer is dishonest. And people are going to call out that dishonesty, regardless of the substance.

"dishonest" is a bit strong to me... I think it is just a different way to express yourself.

Eva7

farfromglorified wrote:

That's fair. But I'm not sure how different that version is. Just because there were plans in place does not mean that this war was unprovocated -- such plans cannot erase or justify the attrocious actions of Hezbollah. Certainly I agree with those who say this war is a disproportional response, but I'm not going to agree that this conflict was strongly desired or engineered.

the Hezbollah's accountability is out of question. but it is not matter of agreeing or not about the israeli plans. If the plans were there before, it is something that we'll have to learn about.

El_Kabong

farfromglorified wrote:

That's pretty much what I'm saying. To pose a question in the form of a question is honest. To pose a question in the form of an answer is dishonest. And people are going to call out that dishonesty, regardless of the substance.

what was 'dishonest' about the single example you provided? as you stated it was 'sarcastic' 'those poor israeli victims...' as in the media is extremely one sided in it's portrayal...we hear and see all about suicide bombings...we see thsoe effects...but they fail to show video of the idf throwing stun grenades in the middle of women and children peacefully portesting them knocking down olive trees...then beating the ppl, shooting at them, then throwing tear gas into the ambulance that comes to take the ppl to the hospital.

as in ppl talk about if there wasn't suicide bombings killing innocent ppl israel wouldn't react like this...but they fail to mention or take into account the subhuman treatment by the israeli government.

so, these ppl see israel as the victims (when in reality it's the civilians on both sides) i was being sarcastic in the title when showing how israel provokes these kinds of actions.

both sides are provoking the other and using those reactions to manipulate their ppl and add fuel to the fires. maybe the sarcasim was going too far, but i fail to see how it is dishonest in that context?

farfromglorified

Eva7 wrote:

"dishonest" is a bit strong to me... I think it is just a different way to express yourself.

Those two things are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

farfromglorified

El_Kabong wrote:

what was 'dishonest' about the single example you provided? as you stated it was 'sarcastic' 'those poor israeli victims...' as in the media is extremely one sided in it's portrayal...we hear and see all about suicide bombings...we see thsoe effects...but they fail to show video of the idf throwing stun grenades in the middle of women and children peacefully portesting them knocking down olive trees...then beating the ppl, shooting at them, then throwing tear gas into the ambulance that comes to take the ppl to the hospital.

So you post things that are just as one-sided? Nice.

as in ppl talk about if there wasn't suicide bombings killing innocent ppl israel wouldn't react like this...but they fail to mention or take into account the subhuman treatment by the israeli government.

So you fail to mention or take into account the opposite? Nice.

so, these ppl see israel as the victims (when in reality it's the civilians on both sides) i was being sarcastic in the title when showing how israel provokes these kinds of actions.

The picture you paint and the reality you discuss are completely at odds. Here are the threads you have started on this conflict:

How U.S. Weapons Manufacturers Profit From Middle East Conflict
pics from Lebanon (warning)
this says the israeli troops were kidnapped INSIDE lebanon
israeli mass graves
can you see both sides?
Israel Hints at a Full-Scale Invasion
those poor israeli victims...
why does israel attack ambulances?
Atrocities in the Promised Land "The Insane Brutality of the State of Israel"
well stated (about peace activist killed by Isreali)
if americans knew...
the effects of occupation
and this is jsutified....b/v why?

Each one has more bias in it than the bias you're lampooning.

both sides are provoking the other and using those reactions to fuel the fires. maybe the sarcasim was going too far, but i fail to see how it is dishonest in that context?

That first statement isn't dishonest at all. How does it measure up against your other words?

Eva7

farfromglorified wrote:

Those two things are not necessarily mutually exclusive.

yes, but in this case it is not matter of dishonesty, since you still are speaking up your mind. dishonest to me is when you say something different than what you have in mind, and I think that the language used by EK is usually even too honest. maybe, from your point of view, you can call his language sometimes provocative, biased, bold, conceited, arrogant, reckless.... but still I wouldn't call it dishonest.

Eva7

farfromglorified wrote:

How U.S. Weapons Manufacturers Profit From Middle East Conflict
pics from Lebanon (warning)
this says the israeli troops were kidnapped INSIDE lebanon
israeli mass graves
can you see both sides?
Israel Hints at a Full-Scale Invasion
those poor israeli victims...
why does israel attack ambulances?
Atrocities in the Promised Land "The Insane Brutality of the State of Israel"
well stated (about peace activist killed by Isreali)
if americans knew...
the effects of occupation
and this is jsutified....b/v why?

Well, at least you have to recognize that he researched more on the subject than the entire staff of the New York Times and the Washington Post all together, and for free!

El_Kabong

farfromglorified wrote:

So you post things that are just as one-sided? Nice.

that depends on if you're comparing it to the bias of everyother poster here who starts threads.

farfromglorified wrote:

So you fail to mention or take into account the opposite? Nice.

see above

farfromglorified wrote:

The picture you paint and the reality you discuss are completely at odds. Here are the threads you have started on this conflict:


Each one has more bias in it than the bias you're lampooning.

of course it has a bias. does that make it false? it is a side of the story that doesn't get coverage on the major networks on everyone's tv. does the bias take away from my stance on the issues? does it mean i really don't think suicide bombings are wrong?? how is this 'bias' different than any other poster. does eva post stories about how well the mission in iraq is going? does suzannepjam post articles towards this administration? does miller start threads about the poor lebanese civillians? does illana post about the suffering of the palestinians? do you post the good side to paying taxes? no...and yet no one makes these complaints to any of them.

farfromglorified wrote:

That first statement isn't dishonest at all. How does it measure up against your other words?

then it was a mistatement when you said 'To pose a question in the form of an answer is dishonest.'? b/c i thought that implied to the thread title...

b/c everyone aggrees that the extreme reactions by hezbollah,hamas, and other groups is wrong. the same can't be said for the extreme reactions of israel. so how do you fix a problem when 1/2 of the problem is given a free pass and all the blame goes to the other 1/2? how would you react if these actions were done to you and just shrugged off? you talk about paying taxes as robbing you w/a gun toyour head...what is this, then? they are taking land at gunpoint and viciously attacking ppl who don't deserve it, the collective punishment...

farfromglorified

Eva7 wrote:

the Hezbollah's accountability is out of question. but it is not matter of agreeing or not about the israeli plans. If the plans were there before, it is something that we'll have to learn about.

Sure. I'm cool with that.

farfromglorified

El_Kabong wrote:

that depends on if you're comparing it to the bias of everyother poster here who starts threads.

I am. And of all those here who show a glimmer of intelligence, your bias is the one of the greatest, IMO.

of course it has a bias. does that make it false?

No. It simply makes it hypocritical when you reject others based on their bias.

it is a side of the story that doesn't get coverage on the major networks on everyone's tv. does the bias take away from my stance on the issues?

Seemingly, yes.

does it mean i really don't think suicide bombings are wrong??

It means you likely think they're less wrong than the opposite.

how is this 'bias' different than any other poster.

It's unapologetic.

does eva post stories about how well the mission in iraq is going?

I don't think so.

does suzannepjam post articles towards this administration?

Not that I've seen.

does miller start threads about the poor lebanese civillians?

I highly doubt it.

does illana post about the suffering of the palestinians?

Not sure.

does anyone criticise hhkc for saying radical muslims are lead by satan and not anything nice?

Yes.

no...and yet no one makes these complaints to any of them.

They don't? I've taken issue with some of those things, and have seen may others do the same.

b/c everyone aggrees that the extreme reactions by hezbollah,hamas, and other groups is wrong. the same can't be said for the extreme reactions of israel. so how do you fix a problem when 1/2 of the problem is given a free pass and all the blame goes to the other 1/2? how would you react if these actions were done to you and just shrugged off? you talk about paying taxes as robbing you w/a gun toyour head...what is this, then? they are taking land at gunpoint and viciously attacking ppl who don't deserve it, the collective punishment...

Who is "they", EK?