Hey now, Findalis - even Eisenhower disagreed with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He's hardly some bleeding-heart liberal. That example doesn't quite fit.
Oh, and just to add to your post in general, Gary - your examples will fit if this particular invasion finally settles (or leads to a final settlement) of the Palestinian situation. I fear that it's only going to exacerbate the situation. (And no, that doesn't mean that I have a better answer. I really wish that I did.)
I deliberately left out Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I have been to Hiroshima. I felt the scene of the Missouri was enough. As for the end results, I can only hope that Israel finishes the job with Hamas. What the hell else are they supposed to do?
We and the Israelis recognize that innocent civilians are suffering. They are trying to limit civilian casualties while Hamas targets civilians.
Ultimately, when a populace is governed and ruled by evil leaders, they will suffer innocent casualties. It is sad but hard to avoid, especially when Hamas hides among the populace.
Funny Lance how the Israelis left Gaza in 2005 and all they got is rockets.
All you see in the MSM is civilians being hurt not the fighters of Hamas. In Israel you see actual casualties and the horror that Hamas has done to Israel.
This war was started by Hamas and it will take Israel to destroy Hamas once and for all.
I'm not trying to second-guess what Israel is doing in response to the attacks. While I don't think that Israel is completely innocent, the Israelis are definitely the ones who seem to be more willing to work toward peace in this case.
I'm just not gung-ho on this whole thing. My only concern is that ultimately this will solve nothing, and we'll find the same cycle of violence happening again and again in this region. If that's the case, then there must be some kind of a better solution - because endless war is no solution. But again, I don't know what that solution would be.
Gary (and others), what do you make of these statistics? They're from the beginning of the second Intifada all the way through November 2008. It sure doesn't look like the Israelis have been the bigger victims to me.
Your source for those stats, clearly has an agenda if you look at their website.
What does it all mean assuming they can document and classify all those deaths?
In WW2, how many Americans were killed in the US by Japanese or German troops (only Pearl harbor).
It all comes down to this: If the Palestinians would accept their negotiated peace of land, call it Palestine and let the Israelis live in peace in theirs, it would stop, wouldn't it? The problem is they want it all. They will not accept the idea of a few million Jews living in their part of the world in an area of land the size of New Jersey-where changing demographics over the last 2000 years make it confusing at best who has historical claim to the land.
I have rejected your comment for a couple of reasons: First, I am not sure whether this is a commercial posting trying to sell T-shirts. Second, you used the F-word. Not that it offends me, but the blog is supposed to have standards of language. Third, you used it to refer to someone's religion. That is not the message we are trying to pass on here. Perhaps, you mistook the tone of this blog in that area.
Gary how many US civilians were killed during the whole WW2 on the US mainland? 6, by a Japanese balloon bomb.
If it stops all rocket attacks permanently then it works. It is scaring the shit out of Hizbollah and Iran. Today's IDF is not the IDF of 2006. Think more like 67 or 73.
Gary, how many times do I have to refute you about Palestinians "wanting it all"? Once again: a plurality (and near majority) of 46% of Palestinians support a two-state solution. Only about 13% support some sort of Palestine-only solution, with the remainder supporting a single-state bi-national solution. See for yourself at the bottom of page 6 of this document.
With all due respect, in spite of these surveys, you can never convince me that the Palestinians don't want it all. They may settle for a two state solution in the next few years, but that will be a temporary strategical measure. As soon as that happens, they will start working toward the eventual destuction of Israel.
So basically you're saying that in the face of all scientific evidence and facts you're just going to keep believing what you want to even though you are clearly incorrect. Why? Well, just because! Conservativism at its best, I suppose.
At this point you're just being hard-headed and stubborn. You don't want to be bothered with things like facts or evidence.
You cite a public opinion poll as some sort of irrefutable evidence. Findalis has cited the Hamas and PLO charters which state their aims.
At a certain point, Bryan, one needs to put aside the public opinion polls and take our enemies at their word. The world did not take Hitler at his word when he wrote Mein Kampf, but it was all in there.
Similarly, many in today's world don't want to take Hamas and the Islamic terrorists at their word.
I take them at their word. That may sound stubborn, but I think it is the sensible approach.
I take them at their words in their charters and what they say on Arab media (when they think the West cannot watch or understand). You can find good translations at MEMRI.
As a person who understands Arabic, I can certify that their translations are true and accurate. Or are you one of the idiots who swear that only an Muslim can translate Arabic.
We could add the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And the Battles of Gettysburg and Waterloo.
ReplyDeleteHey now, Findalis - even Eisenhower disagreed with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. He's hardly some bleeding-heart liberal. That example doesn't quite fit.
ReplyDeleteOh, and just to add to your post in general, Gary - your examples will fit if this particular invasion finally settles (or leads to a final settlement) of the Palestinian situation. I fear that it's only going to exacerbate the situation. (And no, that doesn't mean that I have a better answer. I really wish that I did.)
ReplyDeleteLance,
ReplyDeleteI deliberately left out Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I have been to Hiroshima. I felt the scene of the Missouri was enough. As for the end results, I can only hope that Israel finishes the job with Hamas. What the hell else are they supposed to do?
We and the Israelis recognize that innocent civilians are suffering. They are trying to limit civilian casualties while Hamas targets civilians.
Ultimately, when a populace is governed and ruled by evil leaders, they will suffer innocent casualties. It is sad but hard to avoid, especially when Hamas hides among the populace.
Funny Lance how the Israelis left Gaza in 2005 and all they got is rockets.
ReplyDeleteAll you see in the MSM is civilians being hurt not the fighters of Hamas. In Israel you see actual casualties and the horror that Hamas has done to Israel.
This war was started by Hamas and it will take Israel to destroy Hamas once and for all.
So much for the idea of land for peace.
ReplyDeleteSo much for the idea of land for peace.
ReplyDeleteFindalis,
ReplyDeleteI'm not trying to second-guess what Israel is doing in response to the attacks. While I don't think that Israel is completely innocent, the Israelis are definitely the ones who seem to be more willing to work toward peace in this case.
I'm just not gung-ho on this whole thing. My only concern is that ultimately this will solve nothing, and we'll find the same cycle of violence happening again and again in this region. If that's the case, then there must be some kind of a better solution - because endless war is no solution. But again, I don't know what that solution would be.
Gary (and others), what do you make of these statistics? They're from the beginning of the second Intifada all the way through November 2008. It sure doesn't look like the Israelis have been the bigger victims to me.
ReplyDeleteBryan,
ReplyDeleteYour source for those stats, clearly has an agenda if you look at their website.
What does it all mean assuming they can document and classify all those deaths?
In WW2, how many Americans were killed in the US by Japanese or German troops (only Pearl harbor).
It all comes down to this: If the Palestinians would accept their negotiated peace of land, call it Palestine and let the Israelis live in peace in theirs, it would stop, wouldn't it? The problem is they want it all. They will not accept the idea of a few million Jews living in their part of the world in an area of land the size of New Jersey-where changing demographics over the last 2000 years make it confusing at best who has historical claim to the land.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteI have rejected your comment for a couple of reasons: First, I am not sure whether this is a commercial posting trying to sell T-shirts. Second, you used the F-word. Not that it offends me, but the blog is supposed to have standards of language. Third, you used it to refer to someone's religion. That is not the message we are trying to pass on here. Perhaps, you mistook the tone of this blog in that area.
Gary how many US civilians were killed during the whole WW2 on the US mainland? 6, by a Japanese balloon bomb.
ReplyDeleteIf it stops all rocket attacks permanently then it works. It is scaring the shit out of Hizbollah and Iran. Today's IDF is not the IDF of 2006. Think more like 67 or 73.
Findalis,
ReplyDeleteEven in 2006, I heard an inside report that the IDF were "stacking Hizbollah bodies up like cordwood".
The estimates run between 10,000 and 20,000 Hizbollah thugs killed. Not bad.
ReplyDeleteGary, how many times do I have to refute you about Palestinians "wanting it all"? Once again: a plurality (and near majority) of 46% of Palestinians support a two-state solution. Only about 13% support some sort of Palestine-only solution, with the remainder supporting a single-state bi-national solution. See for yourself at the bottom of page 6 of this document.
ReplyDeleteBryan,
ReplyDeleteWith all due respect, in spite of these surveys, you can never convince me that the Palestinians don't want it all. They may settle for a two state solution in the next few years, but that will be a temporary strategical measure. As soon as that happens, they will start working toward the eventual destuction of Israel.
So basically you're saying that in the face of all scientific evidence and facts you're just going to keep believing what you want to even though you are clearly incorrect. Why? Well, just because! Conservativism at its best, I suppose.
ReplyDeleteAt this point you're just being hard-headed and stubborn. You don't want to be bothered with things like facts or evidence.
Bryan why don't you read this Hamas Charter. Then say that they don't want it all.
ReplyDeleteOr the PLO Charter
It is by their own words that Gary knows the truth. It is sad that you don't.
Bryan,
ReplyDeleteYou cite a public opinion poll as some sort of irrefutable evidence. Findalis has cited the Hamas and PLO charters which state their aims.
At a certain point, Bryan, one needs to put aside the public opinion polls and take our enemies at their word. The world did not take Hitler at his word when he wrote Mein Kampf, but it was all in there.
Similarly, many in today's world don't want to take Hamas and the Islamic terrorists at their word.
I take them at their word. That may sound stubborn, but I think it is the sensible approach.
I take them at their words in their charters and what they say on Arab media (when they think the West cannot watch or understand). You can find good translations at MEMRI.
ReplyDeleteAs a person who understands Arabic, I can certify that their translations are true and accurate. Or are you one of the idiots who swear that only an Muslim can translate Arabic.