Palestenian-Israeli Conflict

So let me see you don't smirk as you type replies. You 'smile' at how silly I (the most recent person you are replying to) am. Yes clearly I got it all wrong.


Brilliant! I have to say you have conclusively proved your point now, I mean really what else can someone say to such incredibly well thought out and reasoned arguments!


Hmmm... how long have you been speaking English Bil? Suggesting something is a natural reaction actually does carry connotations that it is justified i.e. it is naturally how someone would respond. However your missing the point somewhat here, compare and contrast the language you use when describing Israel's actions with the language you use when describing Palestine's... notice anything?


errrrr... You didn't sign up for it but you did just advocate it like 3 posts ago? Remember this...


Shortly after stating this I asked you if it applied in reverse and you responded by saying that your previous posts held the answer and insinuated via your incredibly cutting remark that you weren't advocating a polarised view. But given your previous posts are all tirades against Israel the only conclusion I can draw if I follow your advice is that you actually think having a polarised view against Israel is a good thing.


Ok lets take this point by point so you can follow:
1. No, I haven't. Please provide a quote to prove me wrong.
2. As far as I am aware the Irish President has not been overly involved in dividing the world into good guys and bad guys based on whether or not they are friends with the US. I could be wrong though or you could have assumed you were replying to an American. Wonder which one is right?
3. Great to hear your views on Americans but again I'm not exactly sure what this has to do with me. Also given that I live in the UK and have visited many 'foreign lands' I'm also quite aware of the general sentiment towards America and I think your overplaying your 'outsider view' card a bit.
4. Wonderful, you do know this is a thread about Palestine and Israel though?


Right again I think your working under the mistaken assumption that I am American. I dont recall promoting American foreign policy at any point but again feel free to quote me and prove me wrong.


It's flogging a dead horse at this point but,
1. I'm not American.
2. We have rarely exchanged more than 2 or 3 posts so Im not sure what your past experience of my 'comprehension difficulties' that make you "usually have to make" extra explaining posts is based on.
3. The American president is not my president and I too don't like American foregin policy.
4. Anti-American sentiment is prevalent these days but I don't think its quite as bad as you insist.


Golly Gee... Im shocked. Its not like Ive lived in the UK for 22 years or anything like that. to repeat what I said in the last thread I go to arguably the most left wing university in the UK so it's not like I've never come across arguments such as yours before. However, in my experience the people making the most sensible statements are not the ones on the far left or the ones on the far right but the ones hovering about the center who don't buy into either sides rhetoric. Taking a balanced perspective on affairs on the whole is the best way to go... for example, I can disagree with many aspects of American foreign policy and yet also realise that America can still be involved in positive actions in foreign countries.

Now before you respond and try to suggest that you were referring to people in general and not me in particular I would just like to point out you quoted me, then used the word you and your several times and offered me several pieces of information I may not know about the UK. So in this case a retraction I think might be best.
 
Bil, you tell me that I am not keeping up and yet you can't keep straight who is from what country? I am the American.

If you are concerned with everybody misunderstanding you because we lack reading comprehension, perhaps you might want to look at your writing instead? Frankly, my reading comprehension has always been very good.
 
I'm not sure where this thread is going, theres a pretty definite line in the sand. You either support the Israelis or you support the Palestinians, I dont think it is possible to truly hold a neutral opinion on this matter. So rather than throw insults around, which frankly is pretty pathetic when you consider the number of people who die because of this conflict, can we perhaps get back to a calm discussion of the facts,
 
I didn't actually argue that people were justified in carrying out their "natural reactions". What I was suggesting was just that suggesting that someone is simply responding naturally is suggesting that they are in some way justified in doing so. The point was that Bil only used 'natural reaction' when describing the Palestinian murder of children... but when describing the same action on behalf of the Israeli's it changed from a 'natural reaction' to the 'murder of children'. In case Im not making myself clear I am not justifying either sides murder of innocent children I am criticising Bil Gee's choice of sympathetic terms for one side and negative terms for the other while seemingly promoting a non-polarised perspective.


School of Oriental and African Studies in London. Universities are obviously not going to be classified by the common political orientation of their student body and their lecturers but they do have reputations for them. Also rather interstingly in my experience the common generalisations are correct.


Don't agree with you at all. I sympathise with the Palestinians position because of my undestanding of the history but I don't sympathise at all with their choice to attack unarmed civilians. Likewise I have a negative view of Israeli's actions overall in the conflict in particular the disparity in the severity of their responses and yet I can appreciate that recently they seem the side more inclined towards making progress.

Suggesting you have to take one side is silly and is basically what leads to problems like these in the first place. About the insults I do agree with you however though I think people should get as good as they give. So if Bil Gee continues to lace his responses with unnecessary quips he will get the same back and I think thats fair enough.
 
lol..what are you talking about. Look at yourself, firecoins, and the other new guy who lives in Toronto and is Jewish. I don't remember his name.
 
I can agree with this view. To be honest, Israel has to take action. They have gone overboard in their actions way too often. But they have to take some action.

I also agree that Israel is the one that is trying harder to make progress towards peace at this point. I think if Hamas members had not taken upon themselves to start up the latest escalations, then they may have actually moved towards peace this summer.
 
Nowhere have I said that Israel has not done anything wrong. In several posts I have stated that I believe the majority on both sides really want peace and that it is the extremists on both sides that are pushing for continued violence.

But I will continue to point out that targeting civilians is wrong. Unfortunately, that is the methodolgy of Hamas. It is also Hamas's stated goals to eradicate Israel. There isn't any denial of that.
 
aha theres that bias I was talking about. Some people think Israel are doing more, some people think Israel are saying one thing and doing another
 
lol...how did I know that you would be the one to point this out. I really was waiting for this exact response; tells me about the kind of person that posts it.
First, the numbers came from two different sites, so there was no light injury or serious injury designation. Tear gas and rubber bullets can cause serious injuries as well. For example, here's a story of a then 7 year old girl that was blinded by tear gas from the Israeli army:
http://hotzone.yahoo.com/b/hotzone/blogs2563;_ylt=Apz8QlPUQ7uDHuxNKKhKjAG7u8wF;_ylu=X3oDMTBjM3FjYjBzBHNlYwNibG9nLXN1bQ--
Let me sum up the story:
Children were spraypainting anti-Israeli slogans on walls. The boys ran into neighboring houses when the soldiers came. Soldiers fired tear gas when a little girl (7 years old) opened a door to check if the Israeli's had left. Excessive force, no?

It's strange how you always take the Israeli side (ALWAYS), and then cry about others only taking the Palestinian side.
How many 12 year olds do you think can carry an AK47 and then aim it at you, deal with the recoil, and actually hit the target?
A soldier firing back at a gunman in a group of civilians makes a decision: Retreat because the civilian casualty toll will be too much, or ignore the civilian lives that will probably be lost and shoot to kill the gunman. If the civilians lives are important, you don't shoot, but if they aren't you shoot. What would happen if the Palestinian gunman was holding Israeli children hostage? Would the army shoot then?

May I ask you this as well...whose life is worth more? An Israeli life or a Palestinian life?
 
In fairness when someone rants at me for half of their post about what a blinkered view I have because I'm American, obviously love the American president and American foreign policy and don't understand how the rest of the world views America, when I am in fact Irish, live outside of America and generally have a disfavourable view to American foreign policy I don't really need to do much myself.
 
for me this story totally embodies my distrust and disgust with the Israeli Defence Force and their Lords and Masters

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/4883442.stm
 
I agree.



How would you know, from the points that you've made you clearly haven't been able to follow my arguments. I am not responsible for you deficencies.


If you abuse, kill and torture a population expect them to hit back in any way that they can. That's not good or bad it is simply an inevitable consequence.

The Palestinians don't have tanks and attack choppers so sometimes they will strap bombs to themselves and go into crowded places. Your rather simplistic view of the world rather like medi's somehow distinguishing from using sophisticated weaponry to kill civilians and using suicide bombs. Both are bad both are equally bad.

Do you get it now? I hope so because I can't be bothered explaining it to you again.


What I notice is that the US media calls people terrorists for doing things no worse than the US and it's allies.



I remember it well and you have still to explain the contradiction, you've failed misraebly so far.



thank you, it's nice be appreciated.


[QUOTE[Ok lets take this point by point so you can follow:
1. No, I haven't. Please provide a quote to prove me wrong.[/QUOTE]
Answering this post is tiresome enough.


Have you been taking drugs?


So you agree. It seems appropriate to me to discuss the reputation that America has internationally, as a lot of discussion on the thread is regarding American foreign policy. If you don't agree with this, I don't care.

It has since evolved into a thread about US foreign policy.



Let's just say that I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. There are worse things than just being blinded by patriotism.



As above



To clarify things for you, you clearly have not been able to follow what I've been saying. I have made a perfectly reasonable postings based on the available evidence of what is clearly a very limited understanding of the arguments in hand.



Not surprising, few people outside America do, in fact a lot of people inside America aren't happy with it either. That's something I can never get tired of repeating.



http://www.theodora.com/flags/new8/flag_burning_1.html



You want a medal or something?


When hell freezes over.
 
As I pointed out, I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. There are much worse things than being somebody blinded by patriotism. My estimation of you has, lets say, dropped significantly.
 
You mean the engineer that looks at details?


Would I guess correctly that you have never been in the military and have never had anyone fire a weapon at you?

Would I be correct that getting blinded by tear gas is not a common reaction? Have you ever been exposed to it? I have on many occassions while in the army. I still see fine.

Do you think that the soldiers would have shot people if the kids hadn't run away? In fact, there is no mention that they shot anyone. They used tear gas, presumeably to make it more difficult to get shot. Were they wrong in suspecting that someone might shoot at them through an opening door? Possibly. Possibly not. Was it unfortunate that the little girl lost her sight? Most definitely.



Have you taken the Israeli side in this? No. You have always take the Palestinian side (ALWAYS), and then cry about others only taking Israeli the side.

The reality is that I have said that the majority of both sides want peace. You can look through the thread and check it for yourself.




http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/columnists/shashank_bengali/14039790.htm
http://sf.indymedia.org/news/2004/02/1678473.php
http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/54/168.html
http://www.brookings.edu/views/articles/fellows/singer20050115.pdf

Would you like a few thousand more? The reality is that many kids have ak-47's and have used them as young as 10.

A soldier that is getting fired at will generally return fire. Human shields are an illegal tactic but has been used repeatedly by certain groups. I can think of things that are more despicable regardless of who uses it.

Do you really think the soldier would be able to distinguish between an arab child and a jewish child in the blink of an eye while someone is shooting at them?


The innocent who didn't do anything to anyone is the one whose life is worth more. Regardless of their ethnic origin.
 
An English court found an Israeli soldier guilty of murder. Was the soldier given proper representationa and were the facts properly presented? If so, and the verdict was fair, the soldier needs to be punished. Murder is absolutely inexecusable.
 
I've not been following the thread, but my friends brother was killed by an Israeli soldier a few years back (which seems to relate to your discussion). Israeli soldiers opened fire near children, and as he started to lead them away, they shot him in the head!



http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4896800.stm
http://www.palsolidarity.org/main/2005/08/11/ism-activists-killer-sentenced-to-eight-years-in-prison/
 
.
Quote from above article NewLearner:
According to Human Rights Watch, “The number of official investigations into alleged wrongful use of lethal force equals just two percent of the total number killed and only 15 percent of the number of children killed, despite the fact that many deaths occurred in non-combat circumstances and the extreme unlikelihood that many of the children killed were legitimate targets.”
 
Back
Top