Israel / Palestine

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Israel / Palestine

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 101 of 134 < 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 >

jamiemartin721 Reading 03 Aug 14 9.53pm
Quote SloveniaDave at 03 Aug 2014 8.38pm Quote Stirlingsays at 03 Aug 2014 8.29pm Quote SloveniaDave at 03 Aug 2014 7.56pm Ok, let me explain, in simple terms... You made an entirely unsubstantiated allegation that everyone who opposes the building of the wall is condoning the killing of Israelis. After being pushed, you have now provided some very basic statistics which show that the killings have reduced since the wall was built. I doubt anyone would deny that building the wall has reduced killings, at least in the short term, but to state that people who are opposed to building the wall are condoning the killings is utter nonsense. Has it occurred to you that building the wall may be a very short-sighted solution which, whilst reducing casualties in the short term, may actually provoke and prolong the conflict and ultimately increase the number of casualties? Of course no one knows the answer to that question, but your initial statement was simplistic, arrogant and insulting to everyone who disagreed with you (along with many other comments on this thread an elsewhere). As I have said to you before, I think you should stop pontificating for a while and actually read up a bit on things first so that you could make a more informed and valuable contribution to the debate, if that is what you wish to do. If you do not have the patience to actually sit and learn, then a less arrogant tone to your posts would, I am sure, be appreciated by the majority on here. As it is, you come over simply as the pub boor who thinks that, if they say things loudly and confidently enough, then people will believe you. Edited by SloveniaDave (03 Aug 2014 7.57pm) More condescension: if nothing else your posts to me provide an insight into how you see yourself and obviously me. At least near the beginning of your post you (at last) provide some content before you lapsed back into your usual. Dealing with the content I could see how I might have refined that statement,.but essentially it holds to be mostly true in its consequences. I can see arguments again the wall in terms of route and disruption to Palestinian life. Those who argue that the wall is unjust in those aspects have a point and Israel have a duty of care that they have or haven't taken on. However, if the upshoot of that is that they support the wall coming down.....Well, you can be mealy mouthed all you like but I view that as de facto ignoring or supporting the obvious increase in Israel deaths that would result. Maybe some people are ok with ignoring the practical consequences of there being no more west bank wall rather than openly condoning increased Israeli death.......There is that enough of a refinement to the statement for you? In the future.....As part of a final peace agreement...Where Hamas and other groups are no longer willing to send militants using that method......Well, who knows maybe that wall would come down. Again, utterly stupid bilge. The wall has to go one day, same as the Berlin Wall, or there will never be peace. The only question is the terms on which it is removed. No one condones deaths on either side - when will you get that into your thick head? I do. I condone the killing of militants by the IDF, and of Palestinian actions against the IDF and the settlements, both of which are legal under UN Law. I accept that the IDF has a right to retaliate against attacks on Israel, and that the Palestinian's have a right to resist occupation. What I don't accept is the killing of innocent civilians who are just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Targets of convenience. Its a war, and both sides can present valid legitimate grounds for some of their actions. Any group or state, when it acts militarily has an obligation of duty to target the valid infrastructure, support network and military capacity of their enemy. The problem is that neither side actually cares about who they kill, maim or cripple now. They've become engaged in a conflict in which each atrocity is justified by the last one. "One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug" [Link]
Alert a moderator to this post

jamiemartin721

Reading 03 Aug 14 9.53pm

Quote SloveniaDave at 03 Aug 2014 8.38pm

Quote Stirlingsays at 03 Aug 2014 8.29pm

Quote SloveniaDave at 03 Aug 2014 7.56pm

Ok, let me explain, in simple terms...

You made an entirely unsubstantiated allegation that everyone who opposes the building of the wall is condoning the killing of Israelis.

After being pushed, you have now provided some very basic statistics which show that the killings have reduced since the wall was built.

I doubt anyone would deny that building the wall has reduced killings, at least in the short term, but to state that people who are opposed to building the wall are condoning the killings is utter nonsense.

Has it occurred to you that building the wall may be a very short-sighted solution which, whilst reducing casualties in the short term, may actually provoke and prolong the conflict and ultimately increase the number of casualties?

Of course no one knows the answer to that question, but your initial statement was simplistic, arrogant and insulting to everyone who disagreed with you (along with many other comments on this thread an elsewhere).

As I have said to you before, I think you should stop pontificating for a while and actually read up a bit on things first so that you could make a more informed and valuable contribution to the debate, if that is what you wish to do.

If you do not have the patience to actually sit and learn, then a less arrogant tone to your posts would, I am sure, be appreciated by the majority on here.

As it is, you come over simply as the pub boor who thinks that, if they say things loudly and confidently enough, then people will believe you.

Edited by SloveniaDave (03 Aug 2014 7.57pm)

More condescension: if nothing else your posts to me provide an insight into how you see yourself and obviously me.

At least near the beginning of your post you (at last) provide some content before you lapsed back into your usual.

Dealing with the content I could see how I might have refined that statement,.but essentially it holds to be mostly true in its consequences.

I can see arguments again the wall in terms of route and disruption to Palestinian life. Those who argue that the wall is unjust in those aspects have a point and Israel have a duty of care that they have or haven't taken on.

However, if the upshoot of that is that they support the wall coming down.....Well, you can be mealy mouthed all you like but I view that as de facto ignoring or supporting the obvious increase in Israel deaths that would result.

Maybe some people are ok with ignoring the practical consequences of there being no more west bank wall rather than openly condoning increased Israeli death.......There is that enough of a refinement to the statement for you?

In the future.....As part of a final peace agreement...Where Hamas and other groups are no longer willing to send militants using that method......Well, who knows maybe that wall would come down.

Again, utterly stupid bilge. The wall has to go one day, same as the Berlin Wall, or there will never be peace. The only question is the terms on which it is removed.

No one condones deaths on either side - when will you get that into your thick head?

I do. I condone the killing of militants by the IDF, and of Palestinian actions against the IDF and the settlements, both of which are legal under UN Law. I accept that the IDF has a right to retaliate against attacks on Israel, and that the Palestinian's have a right to resist occupation.

What I don't accept is the killing of innocent civilians who are just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Targets of convenience. Its a war, and both sides can present valid legitimate grounds for some of their actions.

Any group or state, when it acts militarily has an obligation of duty to target the valid infrastructure, support network and military capacity of their enemy.

The problem is that neither side actually cares about who they kill, maim or cripple now. They've become engaged in a conflict in which each atrocity is justified by the last one.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

Alert a moderator to this post

SloveniaDave Tirana, Albania 03 Aug 14 10.04pm
Quote jamiemartin721 at 03 Aug 2014 9.53pm Quote SloveniaDave at 03 Aug 2014 8.38pm Quote Stirlingsays at 03 Aug 2014 8.29pm Quote SloveniaDave at 03 Aug 2014 7.56pm Ok, let me explain, in simple terms... You made an entirely unsubstantiated allegation that everyone who opposes the building of the wall is condoning the killing of Israelis. After being pushed, you have now provided some very basic statistics which show that the killings have reduced since the wall was built. I doubt anyone would deny that building the wall has reduced killings, at least in the short term, but to state that people who are opposed to building the wall are condoning the killings is utter nonsense. Has it occurred to you that building the wall may be a very short-sighted solution which, whilst reducing casualties in the short term, may actually provoke and prolong the conflict and ultimately increase the number of casualties? Of course no one knows the answer to that question, but your initial statement was simplistic, arrogant and insulting to everyone who disagreed with you (along with many other comments on this thread an elsewhere). As I have said to you before, I think you should stop pontificating for a while and actually read up a bit on things first so that you could make a more informed and valuable contribution to the debate, if that is what you wish to do. If you do not have the patience to actually sit and learn, then a less arrogant tone to your posts would, I am sure, be appreciated by the majority on here. As it is, you come over simply as the pub boor who thinks that, if they say things loudly and confidently enough, then people will believe you. Edited by SloveniaDave (03 Aug 2014 7.57pm) More condescension: if nothing else your posts to me provide an insight into how you see yourself and obviously me. At least near the beginning of your post you (at last) provide some content before you lapsed back into your usual. Dealing with the content I could see how I might have refined that statement,.but essentially it holds to be mostly true in its consequences. I can see arguments again the wall in terms of route and disruption to Palestinian life. Those who argue that the wall is unjust in those aspects have a point and Israel have a duty of care that they have or haven't taken on. However, if the upshoot of that is that they support the wall coming down.....Well, you can be mealy mouthed all you like but I view that as de facto ignoring or supporting the obvious increase in Israel deaths that would result. Maybe some people are ok with ignoring the practical consequences of there being no more west bank wall rather than openly condoning increased Israeli death.......There is that enough of a refinement to the statement for you? In the future.....As part of a final peace agreement...Where Hamas and other groups are no longer willing to send militants using that method......Well, who knows maybe that wall would come down. Again, utterly stupid bilge. The wall has to go one day, same as the Berlin Wall, or there will never be peace. The only question is the terms on which it is removed. No one condones deaths on either side - when will you get that into your thick head? I do. I condone the killing of militants by the IDF, and of Palestinian actions against the IDF and the settlements, both of which are legal under UN Law. I accept that the IDF has a right to retaliate against attacks on Israel, and that the Palestinian's have a right to resist occupation. What I don't accept is the killing of innocent civilians who are just in the wrong place at the wrong time. Targets of convenience. Its a war, and both sides can present valid legitimate grounds for some of their actions. Any group or state, when it acts militarily has an obligation of duty to target the valid infrastructure, support network and military capacity of their enemy. The problem is that neither side actually cares about who they kill, maim or cripple now. They've become engaged in a conflict in which each atrocity is justified by the last one. Agreed - my use of the word 'condone' was loose. In terms of 'refrain from punishing', if something is legal under UN and international law, then I would accept it. The fine line is whether condoning something gives it tacit approval though. Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand! My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right. (Member of the School of Optimism 1969-2016 inclusive)
Alert a moderator to this post

SloveniaDave

Tirana, Albania 03 Aug 14 10.04pm

Quote jamiemartin721 at 03 Aug 2014 9.53pm