They are both wrong but one does not justify the other and some people on this message board seem to think that it does.
sooo ... if i oppress you and your family for decades including causing the death of much of your family - you would do nothing? ... sorry - i mean you would not act violently towards me?
sooo ... if i oppress you and your family for decades including causing the death of much of your family - you would do nothing? ... sorry - i mean you would not act violently towards me?
I probably would but I would act against you not your extended family who are just innocent bystanders.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
I don't understand this concept of "innocent" civilians. If a person is living on land that was once stolen from you and elects a government that continuously oppresses you (which has most likely lead to the death of one or more family members - as shown by statistics); and when these civilians are asked to do something about it the two reactions are either to say "I support a two-state solution" and nothing else.. or if you were a radical settler to kick a Palestinian between the teeth and burn down their olive trees. How exactly are they innocent?
I do not condone attacks on civilians (regardless of their innocence) yet as many Americans tend to see the death of Iraqi civilians as "collateral damage", how is this any different?
Oh wait, is it because a suicide bomber directly blows himself up between people instead of firing a rocket into them? Ah yes I get it now.
It kind makes me wonder...how much of these "Palestinian terror attacks" are really disillusioned Palestinians fighting back against Israeli oppression? How much of the violence is being carried out by provocateurs?
The situation is obvious to anyone that really cares or wants to put out an effort...Israel is expanding, and occupying land once held by the Arabs. The 1967 borders-which most people on both sides support-are not enough for Israel-they want more. and a very effective way for them to gain more land is through violence. Violence is where Israel has the upper hand.
* Less than 2/3 (65%) of the Israeli Jewish adult public voiced full support for exclusive Israeli sovereignty over all of Jerusalem.
* Only 8% of the Israeli Jewish adult public believe that the Palestinians will accept the solution of exclusive Israeli sovereignty over all of Jerusalem.
* 28% of the Israeli Jewish adult public is ready to accept the solution of divided sovereignty whereby Israel will have sovereignty over all of West Jerusalem and the Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, while the Palestinians will have sovereignty over the Arab parts of East Jerusalem.
* 25% of the Israeli Jewish adult public believe that the Palestinians will accept the option of Israeli sovereignty over all of West Jerusalem and the Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem, while the Palestinians will have sovereignty over the Arab parts of East Jerusalem. * 56% of the Israeli Jewish adult public believe that the Palestinians will only settle for exclusive Palestinian sovereignty over East Jerusalem on the basis of the June 4, 1967 lines.
* 3% of the Israeli Jewish adult public support joint Israeli-Palestinian undivided sovereignty over all of Jerusalem.
* 3% of the Israeli Jewish adult public support the internationalization of the city under the United Nations
1967 lines...that's a solution to this conflict, one that Israel has refused repeatedly.
It kind makes me wonder...how much of these "Palestinian terror attacks" are really disillusioned Palestinians fighting back against Israeli oppression? How much of the violence is being carried out by provocateurs?
The situation is obvious to anyone that really cares or wants to put out an effort...Israel is expanding, and occupying land once held by the Arabs. The 1967 borders-which most people on both sides support-are not enough for Israel-they want more. and a very effective way for them to gain more land is through violence. Violence is where Israel has the upper hand.
1967 lines...that's a solution to this conflict, one that Israel has refused repeatedly.
Until the 'leaders' of our countries are held accountable it matters fuckall what the people want.
As long as the majority of the populace votes against candidates instead of for candidates nothing will change.
'and I can't imagine why you wouldn't welcome any change, my brother'
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
Until the 'leaders' of our countries are held accountable it matters fuckall what the people want.
As long as the majority of the populace votes against candidates instead of for candidates nothing will change.
But they can't pretend to be a democracy or a free society when 'majority rules' is no longer applicable. the more people know about these polls (and this was a about as far right a poll as you can find-and still over half Israelis polled believed in the 1967 borders) the more people realize the situation.
a small minority is in charge. violence serves Israeli interests, whoever is responsible.
But they can't pretend to be a democracy or a free society when 'majority rules' is no longer applicable. the more people know about these polls (and this was a about as far right a poll as you can find-and still over half Israelis polled believed in the 1967 borders) the more people realize the situation.
a small minority is in charge. violence serves Israeli interests, whoever is responsible.
If I read the poll correctly 56% of Israelis believe the Palestinians would accept the 1967 borders but only 28% actually accept it themselves (see point 3). A Likud win is understandable with these numbers.
If I read the poll correctly 56% of Israelis believe the Palestinians would accept the 1967 borders but only 28% actually accept it themselves (see point 3). A Likud win is understandable with these numbers.
Israeli civilians should b doing more to protest the actions of it's government.
Also many of them will be in the army and fighting for Israel.
They have to do the military thing. How civilian are they?
and then we come to the settlers, none of them are innocent.
Hey man, the Palestinians just need to accept the fact that someone else's god promised their land to the Israeli's, it's apparently like calling shotgun (even though someone's already in the seat and buckled in)
'and I can't imagine why you wouldn't welcome any change, my brother'
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
Hey man, the Palestinians just need to accept the fact that someone else's god promised their land to the Israeli's, it's apparently like calling shotgun (even though someone's already in the seat and buckled in)
I guess its fair if you have the power to beat the crap out of the person already sitting in the front; especially if you have your dad to back you up all the way.
Interesting numbers. It seems the public disapproval is around the time the scandals started emerging and they are slowly gaining ground. Not that Kadima has been a promoter of peace (considering Sharon is one of their founding members) but anything is better than Likud at this point in time.
I don't understand this concept of "innocent" civilians. If a person is living on land that was once stolen from you and elects a government that continuously oppresses you (which has most likely lead to the death of one or more family members - as shown by statistics); and when these civilians are asked to do something about it the two reactions are either to say "I support a two-state solution" and nothing else.. or if you were a radical settler to kick a Palestinian between the teeth and burn down their olive trees. How exactly are they innocent?
I do not condone attacks on civilians (regardless of their innocence) yet as many Americans tend to see the death of Iraqi civilians as "collateral damage", how is this any different?
Oh wait, is it because a suicide bomber directly blows himself up between people instead of firing a rocket into them? Ah yes I get it now.
first of all, americans do NOT see the death of Iraqi civilians as collateral damage. that is complete bullshit.
I've heard your argument before....any civilians living on land post 1967 are considered legitimate targets and should be killed.
how nice.
I also hear the argument that we will have peace on earth if Israel goes back to the 1967 borders and give Jerusalem to the Palestinians so that can use the western wall as a bathroom again. Many people don't know that Palastinians want to go back to 1948. so if Israel goes back to 1967, the same cycle will continue until they go back to 1948. then what 1917?
here is a quote from the chairman of Council on American-Islamic Relations
The transcripts (from an FBI recording) make it clear that all present opposed any peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and, in fact, wanted a Palestinian state on the '48 borders, Palestinian code for the destruction of Israel:
Omar Ahmad: We've always demanded the 1948 territories. I mean, we demanded . . .
Unidentified speaker: Yes, but we don't say that publicly. You cannot say it publicly. In front of the Americans . . .
Ahmad: No, we didn't say that to the Americans.
CAIR seems to hope that, by trumpeting the mistrial as an exoneration, it can bury these disclosures. It has a lot to lose: Numerous people in government and the media, overly eager to find a "moderate" Muslim voice, have long accepted CAIR's denials of its radicalism and its ties to terrorism. The first trial produced copious amounts of evidence to the contrary; if people actually pay attention, CAIR might lose its "moderate" label even in the pages of The New York Times.
first of all, americans do NOT see the death of Iraqi civilians as collateral damage. that is complete bullshit.
Pull a nerve did I? So what exactly did all those who support the war think will happen? Civilians will magically float away from the violence? There are 1 million dead already. Not to mention the previous sanctions which also racked up a similar figure. So they don't think they are collateral damage yet they shrug their shoulders and do fuck all while their army kills more. Wow! You got me beat!
I've heard your argument before....any civilians living on land post 1967 are considered legitimate targets and should be killed.
how nice.
I also hear the argument that we will have peace on earth if Israel goes back to the 1967 borders and give Jerusalem to the Palestinians so that can use the western wall as a bathroom again. Many people don't know that Palastinians want to go back to 1948. so if Israel goes back to 1967, the same cycle will continue until they go back to 1948. then what 1917?
Do you know how to read or did you just magically omit the part where I said I do not condone any attack on civilians regardless of their innocence. My point was to state their innocence is exaggerated.
It is pathetic on your behalf to be blaming the Palestinians for something they have not done yet, not even had the chance to think about yet, not even fathomed the possibility yet. You are arguing that they will use violence in the future to return to the 1948 borders once given the 1967 borders. Well, how about you give them the 1967 borders and then argue this COMPLETE BULLSHIT.
Oh mighty USA save those Israelis, the Palestinians are DEMANDING the 1948 borders.
Pull a nerve did I? So what exactly did all those who support the war think will happen? Civilians will magically float away from the violence? There are 1 million dead already. Not to mention the previous sanctions which also racked up a similar figure. So they don't think they are collateral damage yet they shrug their shoulders and do fuck all while their army kills more. Wow! You got me beat!
supporting the war and supporting the death of Iraqi civilians are two different things. second of all, the Iraq war has very little support for a long time.
Do you know how to read or did you just magically omit the part where I said I do not condone any attack on civilians regardless of their innocence. My point was to state their innocence is exaggerated.
just because you dont have the balls to admit it doesnt mean its not true. besides I said I have heard others make the argument, not necessarily you. although you are saying those people living there are not innocent. I'll even gather a guess that you wouldnt feel too bad if many of the Palestinian rockets starting actually hitting their intended civilian targets.
It is pathetic on your behalf to be blaming the Palestinians for something they have not done yet, not even had the chance to think about yet, not even fathomed the possibility yet. You are arguing that they will use violence in the future to return to the 1948 borders once given the 1967 borders. Well, how about you give them the 1967 borders and then argue this COMPLETE BULLSHIT.
Oh mighty USA save those Israelis, the Palestinians are DEMANDING the 1948 borders.
I didnt make it up pal. I was quoting the chairman of a major Arab organization.
I absolutely think Israel so go back to the 1967 borders (or something close to it) with a shared capital. but I also don't think that would end the problem, but it would be a nice start.
supporting the war and supporting the death of Iraqi civilians are two different things. second of all, the Iraq war has very little support for a long time.
i'm gonna have to side with NoK ... iraq is a fabricated war resulting in the loss of many innocent lives - americans have not held the people accountable for this ... one can only then say the general public either considers these deaths acceptable or they just don't care enuf to do anything about it ...
Israeli civilians should b doing more to protest the actions of it's government.
Also many of them will be in the army and fighting for Israel.
They have to do the military thing. How civilian are they?
and then we come to the settlers, none of them are innocent.
I understand the situation in Israel but I can not in good faith accept the attack on civilians regardless of who they elect or the mandatory military service that is imposed on them. If you believe in that logic then you must believe that it was acceptable for Al Qaida to carry out the 9/11 attacks on us and that the 3,000+ innocent lives taken that day was justifiable.
"When one gets in bed with government, one must expect the diseases it spreads." - Ron Paul
I understand the situation in Israel but I can not in good faith accept the attack on civilians regardless of who they elect or the mandatory military service that is imposed on them. If you believe in that logic then you must believe that it was acceptable for Al Qaida to carry out the 9/11 attacks on us and that the 3,000+ innocent lives taken that day was justifiable.
I agree that it's not acceptable. Taking innocent lives is not justifiable.
However, it's easy for us to sit back and judge . We look at it from our comfortable chairs, talk about it with our families and disregard it all when we go to bed. That's our reality, a comfortable, secure world.
They live in a different world. Their entire lives are shaped by conditions that are not acceptable. There's a genocide against them in process. Their families are killed, robbed of their homes and land, all this while the whole world silently watches and discusses what is acceptable and what is not. It's silly to even entertain the thought that something 'acceptable' can come from this.
It's easy to say it's wrong (and it is wrong) but we can at least try to understand why they resort to such methods. It's because they are left optionless. The world that once nobly sweared 'never again' sits by and actually contributes to these horrible, unjustifiable conditions in which they are forced to live.
To me it's not about pointing out what's wrong and what's right. We're wrong. We're part of the problem. Saying their actions are wrong, although correct, doesn't help anything at all.
We can actually do something about it. We should stop all aid to Israel, all of it. We should be on the side of the oppressed, the ones that are being killed, the victims. If we help them fight this war legitimately they wouldn't have to resort to such horrible methods to defend themselves.
But no, the US supports Israel financially and militarily, it helps them commit genocide against a helpless people. The Palestinians fight with the means they have. They cannot fight "properly", because they don't have the means to do so.
I sincerely hope the world will start to open its eyes soon and go into Palestine and fight with them against the oppressive, genocidal regime of Israel.
I know many will disagree but anyone who supports Israel in this conflict is no different in my eyes than a nazi sympathizer.
first of all, americans do NOT see the death of Iraqi civilians as collateral damage. that is complete bullshit.
They don't see it at all. They don't care. If they actually cared about Iraqis as they care about their own citizens, the war in Iraq would have ended a long time ago.
The US knowingly kills Iraqi civilians. Yet nothing happens. Where are all the marches and demonstrations against it?
I've heard your argument before....any civilians living on land post 1967 are considered legitimate targets and should be killed.
how nice.
You can't just make up bullshit and use it against someone. That's not debate, that's lying.
They don't see it at all. They don't care. If they actually cared about Iraqis as they care about their own citizens, the war in Iraq would have ended a long time ago.
The US knowingly kills Iraqi civilians. Yet nothing happens. Where are all the marches and demonstrations against it?
you are telling there has been no opposition to the Iraq war in the US? where are you from?
You can't just make up bullshit and use it against someone. That's not debate, that's lying.
I agree with NoK, though, they are not innocent.
I'm not making it up, I've heard arguments before that civilians living on occupied land are viable targets. how should these non innocent civilians be dealt with?
you are telling there has been no opposition to the Iraq war in the US? where are you from?
There has been opposition for sure, not by the majority of people, however.
I'm saying I agree with NoK that many Americans tend to see the deaths of Iraqi civilians as collateral damage.
I'm not making it up, I've heard arguments before that civilians living on occupied land are viable targets. how should these non innocent civilians be dealt with?
You are making it up. You said it was NoK's argument. It clearly wasn't, even within the same post he said he didn't condone attacks on civilians.
How should they be dealth with? Peacefully, I guess. But to say they are innocent isn't entirely accurate, imo.
I understand the situation in Israel but I can not in good faith accept the attack on civilians regardless of who they elect or the mandatory military service that is imposed on them. If you believe in that logic then you must believe that it was acceptable for Al Qaida to carry out the 9/11 attacks on us and that the 3,000+ innocent lives taken that day was justifiable.
I think collin made some solid points in his post....But I just want to add to you that, I obvioulsy do not justify killing of innocents.
But let's be realistic here, in regards to 9/11, is it really a fair comparison? Mainly we dont yet know the full story of 9/11. Let's get that first. Then we can bring it up.
Many many many gaps are still wide open when it comes to that day. But for the sake of debate, we can talk about it if you want.
i'm gonna have to side with NoK ... iraq is a fabricated war resulting in the loss of many innocent lives - americans have not held the people accountable for this ... one can only then say the general public either considers these deaths acceptable or they just don't care enuf to do anything about it ...
American apathy, American ignorance, American stupidity. It must be one of those.
and the truth is, even most of the Americans who supported the Iraq war then turned against it later on saying 'Bush tricked us', will be quick to support a war on Iran or another country if/when that happens. Probably under Obama.
Obama will talk about how Iran is a threat to the world and Israel. He will rev them up with some nice catch phrases and then we will see these same Americans line up in support of a new war.
American apathy, American ignorance, American stupidity. It must be one of those.
and the truth is, even most of the Americans who supported the Iraq war then turned against it later on saying 'Bush tricked us', will be quick to support a war on Iran or another country if/when that happens. Probably under Obama.
Obama will talk about how Iran is a threat to the world and Israel. He will rev them up with some nice catch phrases and then we will see these same Americans line up in support of a new war.
Stop just stop, we can't conjecture about what the Palestinians might do (67 border capitulation leading to destruction of Israel) but we can get all huffy about a war the US might start (pre-emptive unilateral attack on Iran).
There are no good answers, just some less bad ones. 67 borders are not great for Israel but they are a good starting point for a 2 state solution but will mean nothing if peace can not be maintained as it is all figured out (this is why Palestinians are made to seem disingenious by American media, their leadership sits down to talk peace and they walk into a mall or on a bus or in a market and blow themselves up). Less bad for Israel, just maintain and slowly work towards control of the entire country( make gestures of controlling settlers and speeches about how no new settlements will be forthcoming and then allow it anyway), then allow the Palestinians to live with in the borders. Treating them as the Jewish population was that lived in dhimmitude or worse from 1700-1900, a period in which some 23% of the population of then Palestine was Jewish and there were very few clashes between the 2 religions.
"The really important thing is not to live, but to live well. And to live well meant, along with more enjoyable things in life, to live according to your principles."
— Socrates
why do some people make it out like this israeli-palestinian conflict is an actual war?? ... we're not talking about two sides battling it out ... we're talking about one with a huge military and backing that has people living a high standard of life vs. another group that are mostly living in what we would ball in poverty, having to buy arms from wherever they can ...
one side has the newest military technology ... the others have slingshots ...
why do some people make it out like this israeli-palestinian conflict is an actual war?? ... we're not talking about two sides battling it out ... we're talking about one with a huge military and backing that has people living a high standard of life vs. another group that are mostly living in what we would ball in poverty, having to buy arms from wherever they can ...
one side has the newest military technology ... the others have slingshots ...
rockets =/= slingshots
carbombs =/= slingshots
but i get where you are coming from because when the israeli military takes pot shots at kids throwing rocks at their tanks its pretty stupid on their part.
"The really important thing is not to live, but to live well. And to live well meant, along with more enjoyable things in life, to live according to your principles."
— Socrates
Comments
this is an israeli organization ...
sooo ... if i oppress you and your family for decades including causing the death of much of your family - you would do nothing? ... sorry - i mean you would not act violently towards me?
I probably would but I would act against you not your extended family who are just innocent bystanders.
ok ... now, let's say I am an entire gov't? ... what do you do then?
Attack the government, not civilians.
I do not condone attacks on civilians (regardless of their innocence) yet as many Americans tend to see the death of Iraqi civilians as "collateral damage", how is this any different?
Oh wait, is it because a suicide bomber directly blows himself up between people instead of firing a rocket into them? Ah yes I get it now.
http://www.pej.org/html/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=3331&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
It kind makes me wonder...how much of these "Palestinian terror attacks" are really disillusioned Palestinians fighting back against Israeli oppression? How much of the violence is being carried out by provocateurs?
The situation is obvious to anyone that really cares or wants to put out an effort...Israel is expanding, and occupying land once held by the Arabs. The 1967 borders-which most people on both sides support-are not enough for Israel-they want more. and a very effective way for them to gain more land is through violence. Violence is where Israel has the upper hand.
1967 lines...that's a solution to this conflict, one that Israel has refused repeatedly.
Until the 'leaders' of our countries are held accountable it matters fuckall what the people want.
As long as the majority of the populace votes against candidates instead of for candidates nothing will change.
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
But they can't pretend to be a democracy or a free society when 'majority rules' is no longer applicable. the more people know about these polls (and this was a about as far right a poll as you can find-and still over half Israelis polled believed in the 1967 borders) the more people realize the situation.
a small minority is in charge. violence serves Israeli interests, whoever is responsible.
If I read the poll correctly 56% of Israelis believe the Palestinians would accept the 1967 borders but only 28% actually accept it themselves (see point 3). A Likud win is understandable with these numbers.
Israeli civilians should b doing more to protest the actions of it's government.
Also many of them will be in the army and fighting for Israel.
They have to do the military thing. How civilian are they?
and then we come to the settlers, none of them are innocent.
This actually looks encouraging.... http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/view/32173/likud_and_kadima_fight_israeli_election
Nov. 2007
Likud 31
Kadima 13
Mar. 2008
Likud 26
Kadima 16
Oct. 2008
Likud 25
Kadima 22
edit:number of seats.
Hey man, the Palestinians just need to accept the fact that someone else's god promised their land to the Israeli's, it's apparently like calling shotgun (even though someone's already in the seat and buckled in)
'How a culture can forget its plan of yesterday
and you swear it's not a trend
it doesn't matter anyway
there's no need to talk as friends
nothing news everyday
all the kids will eat it up
if it's packaged properly'
I guess its fair if you have the power to beat the crap out of the person already sitting in the front; especially if you have your dad to back you up all the way.
Interesting numbers. It seems the public disapproval is around the time the scandals started emerging and they are slowly gaining ground. Not that Kadima has been a promoter of peace (considering Sharon is one of their founding members) but anything is better than Likud at this point in time.
first of all, americans do NOT see the death of Iraqi civilians as collateral damage. that is complete bullshit.
I've heard your argument before....any civilians living on land post 1967 are considered legitimate targets and should be killed.
how nice.
I also hear the argument that we will have peace on earth if Israel goes back to the 1967 borders and give Jerusalem to the Palestinians so that can use the western wall as a bathroom again. Many people don't know that Palastinians want to go back to 1948. so if Israel goes back to 1967, the same cycle will continue until they go back to 1948. then what 1917?
here is a quote from the chairman of Council on American-Islamic Relations
http://www.nypost.com/seven/10292007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/evil_exposed.htm?page=0
The transcripts (from an FBI recording) make it clear that all present opposed any peaceful resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and, in fact, wanted a Palestinian state on the '48 borders, Palestinian code for the destruction of Israel:
Omar Ahmad: We've always demanded the 1948 territories. I mean, we demanded . . .
Unidentified speaker: Yes, but we don't say that publicly. You cannot say it publicly. In front of the Americans . . .
Ahmad: No, we didn't say that to the Americans.
CAIR seems to hope that, by trumpeting the mistrial as an exoneration, it can bury these disclosures. It has a lot to lose: Numerous people in government and the media, overly eager to find a "moderate" Muslim voice, have long accepted CAIR's denials of its radicalism and its ties to terrorism. The first trial produced copious amounts of evidence to the contrary; if people actually pay attention, CAIR might lose its "moderate" label even in the pages of The New York Times.
Pull a nerve did I? So what exactly did all those who support the war think will happen? Civilians will magically float away from the violence? There are 1 million dead already. Not to mention the previous sanctions which also racked up a similar figure. So they don't think they are collateral damage yet they shrug their shoulders and do fuck all while their army kills more. Wow! You got me beat!
Do you know how to read or did you just magically omit the part where I said I do not condone any attack on civilians regardless of their innocence. My point was to state their innocence is exaggerated.
It is pathetic on your behalf to be blaming the Palestinians for something they have not done yet, not even had the chance to think about yet, not even fathomed the possibility yet. You are arguing that they will use violence in the future to return to the 1948 borders once given the 1967 borders. Well, how about you give them the 1967 borders and then argue this COMPLETE BULLSHIT.
Oh mighty USA save those Israelis, the Palestinians are DEMANDING the 1948 borders.
supporting the war and supporting the death of Iraqi civilians are two different things. second of all, the Iraq war has very little support for a long time.
just because you dont have the balls to admit it doesnt mean its not true. besides I said I have heard others make the argument, not necessarily you. although you are saying those people living there are not innocent. I'll even gather a guess that you wouldnt feel too bad if many of the Palestinian rockets starting actually hitting their intended civilian targets.
I didnt make it up pal. I was quoting the chairman of a major Arab organization.
I absolutely think Israel so go back to the 1967 borders (or something close to it) with a shared capital. but I also don't think that would end the problem, but it would be a nice start.
i'm gonna have to side with NoK ... iraq is a fabricated war resulting in the loss of many innocent lives - americans have not held the people accountable for this ... one can only then say the general public either considers these deaths acceptable or they just don't care enuf to do anything about it ...
I understand the situation in Israel but I can not in good faith accept the attack on civilians regardless of who they elect or the mandatory military service that is imposed on them. If you believe in that logic then you must believe that it was acceptable for Al Qaida to carry out the 9/11 attacks on us and that the 3,000+ innocent lives taken that day was justifiable.
I agree that it's not acceptable. Taking innocent lives is not justifiable.
However, it's easy for us to sit back and judge . We look at it from our comfortable chairs, talk about it with our families and disregard it all when we go to bed. That's our reality, a comfortable, secure world.
They live in a different world. Their entire lives are shaped by conditions that are not acceptable. There's a genocide against them in process. Their families are killed, robbed of their homes and land, all this while the whole world silently watches and discusses what is acceptable and what is not. It's silly to even entertain the thought that something 'acceptable' can come from this.
It's easy to say it's wrong (and it is wrong) but we can at least try to understand why they resort to such methods. It's because they are left optionless. The world that once nobly sweared 'never again' sits by and actually contributes to these horrible, unjustifiable conditions in which they are forced to live.
To me it's not about pointing out what's wrong and what's right. We're wrong. We're part of the problem. Saying their actions are wrong, although correct, doesn't help anything at all.
We can actually do something about it. We should stop all aid to Israel, all of it. We should be on the side of the oppressed, the ones that are being killed, the victims. If we help them fight this war legitimately they wouldn't have to resort to such horrible methods to defend themselves.
But no, the US supports Israel financially and militarily, it helps them commit genocide against a helpless people. The Palestinians fight with the means they have. They cannot fight "properly", because they don't have the means to do so.
I sincerely hope the world will start to open its eyes soon and go into Palestine and fight with them against the oppressive, genocidal regime of Israel.
I know many will disagree but anyone who supports Israel in this conflict is no different in my eyes than a nazi sympathizer.
naděje umírá poslední
They don't see it at all. They don't care. If they actually cared about Iraqis as they care about their own citizens, the war in Iraq would have ended a long time ago.
The US knowingly kills Iraqi civilians. Yet nothing happens. Where are all the marches and demonstrations against it?
You can't just make up bullshit and use it against someone. That's not debate, that's lying.
I agree with NoK, though, they are not innocent.
naděje umírá poslední
you are telling there has been no opposition to the Iraq war in the US? where are you from?
I'm not making it up, I've heard arguments before that civilians living on occupied land are viable targets. how should these non innocent civilians be dealt with?
There has been opposition for sure, not by the majority of people, however.
I'm saying I agree with NoK that many Americans tend to see the deaths of Iraqi civilians as collateral damage.
You are making it up. You said it was NoK's argument. It clearly wasn't, even within the same post he said he didn't condone attacks on civilians.
How should they be dealth with? Peacefully, I guess. But to say they are innocent isn't entirely accurate, imo.
naděje umírá poslední
I think collin made some solid points in his post....But I just want to add to you that, I obvioulsy do not justify killing of innocents.
But let's be realistic here, in regards to 9/11, is it really a fair comparison? Mainly we dont yet know the full story of 9/11. Let's get that first. Then we can bring it up.
Many many many gaps are still wide open when it comes to that day. But for the sake of debate, we can talk about it if you want.
American apathy, American ignorance, American stupidity. It must be one of those.
and the truth is, even most of the Americans who supported the Iraq war then turned against it later on saying 'Bush tricked us', will be quick to support a war on Iran or another country if/when that happens. Probably under Obama.
Obama will talk about how Iran is a threat to the world and Israel. He will rev them up with some nice catch phrases and then we will see these same Americans line up in support of a new war.
actions speak louder than words ...
There are no good answers, just some less bad ones. 67 borders are not great for Israel but they are a good starting point for a 2 state solution but will mean nothing if peace can not be maintained as it is all figured out (this is why Palestinians are made to seem disingenious by American media, their leadership sits down to talk peace and they walk into a mall or on a bus or in a market and blow themselves up). Less bad for Israel, just maintain and slowly work towards control of the entire country( make gestures of controlling settlers and speeches about how no new settlements will be forthcoming and then allow it anyway), then allow the Palestinians to live with in the borders. Treating them as the Jewish population was that lived in dhimmitude or worse from 1700-1900, a period in which some 23% of the population of then Palestine was Jewish and there were very few clashes between the 2 religions.
— Socrates
one side has the newest military technology ... the others have slingshots ...
carbombs =/= slingshots
but i get where you are coming from because when the israeli military takes pot shots at kids throwing rocks at their tanks its pretty stupid on their part.
— Socrates