Phaedrus
"They could have been somebody"...
Are you nuts or what?
Tell me Phaedrus, name another people or religion where so few have contributed so much to mankind's development - and you pick the field.
If not for the oil in the regiion, the Arabs would still be riding camels, in bliss.
"They could have been somebody"...
Are you nuts or what?
Tell me Phaedrus, name another people or religion where so few have contributed so much to mankind's development - and you pick the field.
If not for the oil in the regiion, the Arabs would still be riding camels, in bliss.
>name another people or religion where so
>few have contributed so much to mankind's
>development
Mormons?
>few have contributed so much to mankind's
>development
Mormons?
Joey C, you misunderstand what I am saying.
As I said, it is folly to mistake the Zionist state for the Jewish people, just as it is folly to mistake the Hezbollah for a representative of the Palestinians.
The qualities which you recognise in the Jewish people overall are not well-represented by anyone in the last five decades of illegal, murderous occupation.
The specific context of my "could have been somebody" reference was contrasting what might have been had the Israeli councils accepted the incredibly generous offer of Grand Island, New York as an autonomous Jewish state. Grand Island is the world's largest freshwater island, and considering it's proximity to commerce and cultural centers of North America such as New York, Chicago and Toronto, a Jewish culture established there at the time (late 19th century) would no doubt today rival some of the world's great cities.
One of the major schisms in Jewish culture is between Zionists and the orthodox sect the Naturei Karta, who have from the beginning condemend the occupation of Palestiian lands under the guise of reclamation of "sovereign territory." Historian Jacob Klatzkin, philosopher Hermann Cohen and theologist Leo Baeck were all early 20th century Jewish noteworthies who were vehemently opposed to the polciies laid out under the Balfour Declaration. All were proponents, far more eloquently than myself, of morality as a natural phenomenon, of ethics based in the freedom of everyone, Jewsih or otherwise, of a society based on laws and ethics which would yield a more overall successful citizenry which was free to pursue politics, business, science, art, etc. without compunction, censorship or oppression.
Other modern Jewish leaders, such as Israeli philosopher Martin Buber and American scholar Mortecai Kaplan have been strongly in opposition to the notion of long-dead links to a certain patch of land being a justification for war as mystical, irrational, pretentious and destructive.
Phaedrus
As I said, it is folly to mistake the Zionist state for the Jewish people, just as it is folly to mistake the Hezbollah for a representative of the Palestinians.
The qualities which you recognise in the Jewish people overall are not well-represented by anyone in the last five decades of illegal, murderous occupation.
The specific context of my "could have been somebody" reference was contrasting what might have been had the Israeli councils accepted the incredibly generous offer of Grand Island, New York as an autonomous Jewish state. Grand Island is the world's largest freshwater island, and considering it's proximity to commerce and cultural centers of North America such as New York, Chicago and Toronto, a Jewish culture established there at the time (late 19th century) would no doubt today rival some of the world's great cities.
One of the major schisms in Jewish culture is between Zionists and the orthodox sect the Naturei Karta, who have from the beginning condemend the occupation of Palestiian lands under the guise of reclamation of "sovereign territory." Historian Jacob Klatzkin, philosopher Hermann Cohen and theologist Leo Baeck were all early 20th century Jewish noteworthies who were vehemently opposed to the polciies laid out under the Balfour Declaration. All were proponents, far more eloquently than myself, of morality as a natural phenomenon, of ethics based in the freedom of everyone, Jewsih or otherwise, of a society based on laws and ethics which would yield a more overall successful citizenry which was free to pursue politics, business, science, art, etc. without compunction, censorship or oppression.
Other modern Jewish leaders, such as Israeli philosopher Martin Buber and American scholar Mortecai Kaplan have been strongly in opposition to the notion of long-dead links to a certain patch of land being a justification for war as mystical, irrational, pretentious and destructive.
Phaedrus
Phaed:
Yes, and it's your folly.
98% of the Jewish People are definately linked to Israel.
You are not scholar on the matter.
Yes, and it's your folly.
98% of the Jewish People are definately linked to Israel.
You are not scholar on the matter.
"last five decades of illegal, murderous occupation
Where in the heck did you come up with this Bullshit. Do you know anything about the history of the State of Israel?
The fact is that no one wants the Palestineans, otherwise Jordan, Syria or Egypt would have absorbed them.
Further, the Palestineans have contributed NOTHING to the world, I repeat NOTHING. I have been to Israel, you are in the middle of the fvking desert and they are growing everything. Their technology is top notch.
Lastly, we can all thank the Israels for
BLOWING UP SADAMS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT WHICH THE FRENCH WERE HELPING HIM BUILD!
I take that back, the Palestineans have given us a new form of Kamikazes, homicide bombers stupid enough to blow themselves up for Allah.
I admit that when the war started I wanted to run outside and empty my guns in the air like the Arabs do. However, I know that what goes up, must come down.
Aren't the Muslims over-using Jihad?
Everything today is a Jihad.
Where in the heck did you come up with this Bullshit. Do you know anything about the history of the State of Israel?
The fact is that no one wants the Palestineans, otherwise Jordan, Syria or Egypt would have absorbed them.
Further, the Palestineans have contributed NOTHING to the world, I repeat NOTHING. I have been to Israel, you are in the middle of the fvking desert and they are growing everything. Their technology is top notch.
Lastly, we can all thank the Israels for
BLOWING UP SADAMS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT WHICH THE FRENCH WERE HELPING HIM BUILD!
I take that back, the Palestineans have given us a new form of Kamikazes, homicide bombers stupid enough to blow themselves up for Allah.
I admit that when the war started I wanted to run outside and empty my guns in the air like the Arabs do. However, I know that what goes up, must come down.
Aren't the Muslims over-using Jihad?
Everything today is a Jihad.
JoeyC, I do not claim to be a scholar on the matter. You seem to infer that you are, yet demonstrate a lack of fundamental reading skills.
Jewish people are, of course, linked to Israel as their holy land, as a Jewish community, as an historic matter. What I am saying is, that Israel qua the Begin-Sharon type administrations, qua the faked terrorist attack on the King David Hotel as a pretext for starting a war, etc. has as little to do with the average Jewish person as the Hezbollah and PLO-led murders of innocent Jews has to do with the average Palestinian.
KennyB, your assessment of the Palestinians says it all. Many say the same of the Jewish people, and in both instances I disagree.
I question both of your knowledge of the history of the state of Israel, but again do not claim to be a scholar myself. I prefer to defer to true scholars such as named in my post above, who (as I said before) make the point n a far more eloquent manner and form a more knowledgable and experienced viewpoint than my own -- but I do point out that they make the same point as I on the whole.
Phaedrus
Jewish people are, of course, linked to Israel as their holy land, as a Jewish community, as an historic matter. What I am saying is, that Israel qua the Begin-Sharon type administrations, qua the faked terrorist attack on the King David Hotel as a pretext for starting a war, etc. has as little to do with the average Jewish person as the Hezbollah and PLO-led murders of innocent Jews has to do with the average Palestinian.
KennyB, your assessment of the Palestinians says it all. Many say the same of the Jewish people, and in both instances I disagree.
I question both of your knowledge of the history of the state of Israel, but again do not claim to be a scholar myself. I prefer to defer to true scholars such as named in my post above, who (as I said before) make the point n a far more eloquent manner and form a more knowledgable and experienced viewpoint than my own -- but I do point out that they make the same point as I on the whole.
Phaedrus
Mouth of CR,
Very ignorant statement.
Joey,
Isn't Turkey democratic?
Very ignorant statement.
Joey,
Isn't Turkey democratic?
Phaedrus,
First lets start with my assessment of the Palestineans. I don't know of one positive thing that the Palestineans have added to the world. I 100% stand behind that statement. Prove me wrong.
While many in this world have blamed the Jews for virtually every problem, I have never heard anyone claim that the Jews add nothing to this world. Plain and simple. Technology and innovation.
Lets get beyond this though.
If you know anything about the Palestine Mandate in the early 1920's, England (and France) cut up the region and promised the Jews a homeland.
It wasn't until after the Holocaust in 1948 that the UN voted to give the Jews a sliver of land know known as Israel. Israel immediately was attacked by 5neighboring friendly Arab nations and managed to repel the attacks.
The Arabs refused to recognize Israel and to this date the charter of the PLO and most of the Arabs in the region call for the TOTAL DESTRUCTION of the State of Israel.
Of course Israel is called the terrorist. They allow citizenship to Arabs and even have Arab members in the Kenneset (Parliament). They are the only democratic society in the region.
I have spent time studying in Israel and know a lot about its history.
I again THANK ISRAEL for bombing Saddam's nuclear facility.
Most Jews worldwide do consider Israel to represent Jews.
First lets start with my assessment of the Palestineans. I don't know of one positive thing that the Palestineans have added to the world. I 100% stand behind that statement. Prove me wrong.
While many in this world have blamed the Jews for virtually every problem, I have never heard anyone claim that the Jews add nothing to this world. Plain and simple. Technology and innovation.
Lets get beyond this though.
If you know anything about the Palestine Mandate in the early 1920's, England (and France) cut up the region and promised the Jews a homeland.
It wasn't until after the Holocaust in 1948 that the UN voted to give the Jews a sliver of land know known as Israel. Israel immediately was attacked by 5neighboring friendly Arab nations and managed to repel the attacks.
The Arabs refused to recognize Israel and to this date the charter of the PLO and most of the Arabs in the region call for the TOTAL DESTRUCTION of the State of Israel.
Of course Israel is called the terrorist. They allow citizenship to Arabs and even have Arab members in the Kenneset (Parliament). They are the only democratic society in the region.
I have spent time studying in Israel and know a lot about its history.
I again THANK ISRAEL for bombing Saddam's nuclear facility.
Most Jews worldwide do consider Israel to represent Jews.
as we stray off topic again,let me add a little something......
in a half-assed sort of way,cr mouth hit on some legit points,although he bludgeoned and misrepresented them in an honest attempt at israel bashing ......
i do believe that a part of the rationale for this war is the safety and continued survival of israel...and oil in general
if we remember back in the mid 80`s,our good friend and buddy france went out of their way to help iraq build a nuclear reactor.....
the israeli`s,realizing this to be a serious threat to their survival,zapped the reactor before it could be completed....
then,iraq ,after their tussle with iran,decided that some of kuwait`s oil fields belonged to them,decided to stroll over,grab a little bit of kuwait...and maybe if things went well,grab them some saudi arabia(conjecture).....
the u.n. put the kibosh on that little foray,driving saddam out of kuwait....but not before he set fire to the oil fields,creating an ecological disaster the affects of which are still felt today...and let`s dispel the myth that the u.s. made a mistake by not taking out saddam then...that was a u.n. operation and removing saddam from iraq was not part of their gameplan(france and russia)...
saddam decided that it would be a great idea to try and get as much arab sympathy as possible,and maybe start a jihad,so he lobbed a couple scuds into israel for good measure,hoping for retaliation.......unfortunately for him,israel was smart enough to sit on it`s hands,thereby bursting saddam`s jihad balloon...
one of saddam`s most famous quotes is the,"my biggest mistake when going into kuwait was not having nuclear weapons"....
what if,israel had not bombed that nuclear reactor?.......and saddam had nuclear weapons....it`s very possible that the u.n. would not have gotten involved...the nuclear weapon is the ultimate trump card for despots...that`s why they are trying to obtain them....and why n.korea is a particularly tough problem....
if the u.n.or the u.s. with a similar coalition,had gone in to extract saddam,there`s an excellent chance that he`d have lobbed a few nukes into israel,not just scuds..it is said that 3 hiroshima sized nukes would pretty much annihilate a country the size of israel......and voila,israel retaliates(if it`s not to late),and there`s your jihad....or maybe even ww3......
i never publicly said i agreed with this war...but,i did say that i understood the rationale.....and i believe that israel is much more than a peripheral reason.....and i might say,rightly so...
saddam has shown to be much more than your average dictator....invading several of his neighbors,attempting to build and or acquire wmd`s....and use them on his own people....
n.korea,by all indications may have nuclear weapons,but it is unclear that they can deliver them(at least not to the u.s....i have read that was an exaggeration...their delivery systems are still relatively untested)....but they are a supplier of weapons to terrorist sympathizer nations like yemen and do threaten s.korea and japan....thank god that china is getting a little sick of kim jung il`s bluster...if you notice,n korea has toned the rhetoric down quite a bit since the war started(thanks to a swift economic kick in the balls from china)....i don`t believe china and russia will sit back and let n.korea shit all over their backyard...i think we`ll get much cooperation on the n korea issue....
but,there is no powder keg like the middle east....yes,oil is a large part of the equation....not necessarily iraqi oil alone,but the middle east`s as a whole...
and it`s certainly not in the u.s.` best interests to let the one guy in the middle east hang around that`s ballsy enough and crazy enough to trigger a catastrophe....
in a half-assed sort of way,cr mouth hit on some legit points,although he bludgeoned and misrepresented them in an honest attempt at israel bashing ......
i do believe that a part of the rationale for this war is the safety and continued survival of israel...and oil in general
if we remember back in the mid 80`s,our good friend and buddy france went out of their way to help iraq build a nuclear reactor.....
the israeli`s,realizing this to be a serious threat to their survival,zapped the reactor before it could be completed....
then,iraq ,after their tussle with iran,decided that some of kuwait`s oil fields belonged to them,decided to stroll over,grab a little bit of kuwait...and maybe if things went well,grab them some saudi arabia(conjecture).....
the u.n. put the kibosh on that little foray,driving saddam out of kuwait....but not before he set fire to the oil fields,creating an ecological disaster the affects of which are still felt today...and let`s dispel the myth that the u.s. made a mistake by not taking out saddam then...that was a u.n. operation and removing saddam from iraq was not part of their gameplan(france and russia)...
saddam decided that it would be a great idea to try and get as much arab sympathy as possible,and maybe start a jihad,so he lobbed a couple scuds into israel for good measure,hoping for retaliation.......unfortunately for him,israel was smart enough to sit on it`s hands,thereby bursting saddam`s jihad balloon...
one of saddam`s most famous quotes is the,"my biggest mistake when going into kuwait was not having nuclear weapons"....
what if,israel had not bombed that nuclear reactor?.......and saddam had nuclear weapons....it`s very possible that the u.n. would not have gotten involved...the nuclear weapon is the ultimate trump card for despots...that`s why they are trying to obtain them....and why n.korea is a particularly tough problem....
if the u.n.or the u.s. with a similar coalition,had gone in to extract saddam,there`s an excellent chance that he`d have lobbed a few nukes into israel,not just scuds..it is said that 3 hiroshima sized nukes would pretty much annihilate a country the size of israel......and voila,israel retaliates(if it`s not to late),and there`s your jihad....or maybe even ww3......
i never publicly said i agreed with this war...but,i did say that i understood the rationale.....and i believe that israel is much more than a peripheral reason.....and i might say,rightly so...
saddam has shown to be much more than your average dictator....invading several of his neighbors,attempting to build and or acquire wmd`s....and use them on his own people....
n.korea,by all indications may have nuclear weapons,but it is unclear that they can deliver them(at least not to the u.s....i have read that was an exaggeration...their delivery systems are still relatively untested)....but they are a supplier of weapons to terrorist sympathizer nations like yemen and do threaten s.korea and japan....thank god that china is getting a little sick of kim jung il`s bluster...if you notice,n korea has toned the rhetoric down quite a bit since the war started(thanks to a swift economic kick in the balls from china)....i don`t believe china and russia will sit back and let n.korea shit all over their backyard...i think we`ll get much cooperation on the n korea issue....
but,there is no powder keg like the middle east....yes,oil is a large part of the equation....not necessarily iraqi oil alone,but the middle east`s as a whole...
and it`s certainly not in the u.s.` best interests to let the one guy in the middle east hang around that`s ballsy enough and crazy enough to trigger a catastrophe....
KennyB, to be clear for the fourth time, I was not attempting to create a Palestinians are Better Than Jews Day celebration, or a Jews Are Better Than Palestinains Day celebration. I am more celbratory of the fact that people who do not steal and murder are better than people who do.
The Palestinians don't actually owe you or the world anything, so I am uncertain what barometer you use to measure their "contribution." And I am in full agreement that people of Jewsih derivation have contributed a tremendous amount of good to the world, while being universally dumped on by that same world over and over again for centuries.
So, as you said, let's move past that.
You say:
"If you know anything about the Palestine Mandate in the early 1920's, England (and France) cut up the region and promised the Jews a homeland."
As motivated by the Balfour Declaration in 1917. However, intense studying of maps from that era do not seem to properly reflect Jerusalem's proximity to London. I understand that the Mercator Projection can cause some distortion, but holy crap.
Perhaps it was "under British control." Like Africa, like the US at one point. Britain's centuries of imperialist abuse of virtually every culture on earth gives it the authority to "carve up the region" in the 1920's?
You say:
"Most Jews worldwide do consider Israel to represent Jews."
I suspect strongly that this is predominantly in the sense I referenced above. Living in a veritable hotbed of liberal Jewish Americans in the D.C. area, many of whom I considered very knowledgeable on the matter, gave me the impression that they on the whole despised what was going on in Israel, both suicide bombers and tank drivers alike. Many seemed of a mind that as the obviously better-armed, better-backed, better-trained, and better-financed side, who could initiat genocide at will but had themselves been subjected to that very horror so recently in history, that it was the impetus of the Israeli government to end the tension and not that of the scattered PLO suicide fruitcake.
I personally believe that on both sides of the conflict, there are men in power who do not seek an end to the violence and death -- they seek a genocide, one which they can legitimise through the vilification of the enemy.
Just my own $ 0.02 .
Since you spent time studying Israel and know it's history would you mind weighing in on what you think the result would have been had the Israelis accepted grand island as a homeland, or why you suppose they did not? Or why the Balfour Declaration and it's subsequent British (and French) mandates on the disposal of land and peoples outside of Britain (and France) are valid? Also, any suggestion as to what would finally bring about an end to the conflict? You obviously admire Israel and must be pained to see so many innocents die, and even if you utterly detest the Palestinians you can't seriously wish for them to simply be exterminated as a means to the end of peace.
Phaedrus
The Palestinians don't actually owe you or the world anything, so I am uncertain what barometer you use to measure their "contribution." And I am in full agreement that people of Jewsih derivation have contributed a tremendous amount of good to the world, while being universally dumped on by that same world over and over again for centuries.
So, as you said, let's move past that.
You say:
"If you know anything about the Palestine Mandate in the early 1920's, England (and France) cut up the region and promised the Jews a homeland."
As motivated by the Balfour Declaration in 1917. However, intense studying of maps from that era do not seem to properly reflect Jerusalem's proximity to London. I understand that the Mercator Projection can cause some distortion, but holy crap.
Perhaps it was "under British control." Like Africa, like the US at one point. Britain's centuries of imperialist abuse of virtually every culture on earth gives it the authority to "carve up the region" in the 1920's?
You say:
"Most Jews worldwide do consider Israel to represent Jews."
I suspect strongly that this is predominantly in the sense I referenced above. Living in a veritable hotbed of liberal Jewish Americans in the D.C. area, many of whom I considered very knowledgeable on the matter, gave me the impression that they on the whole despised what was going on in Israel, both suicide bombers and tank drivers alike. Many seemed of a mind that as the obviously better-armed, better-backed, better-trained, and better-financed side, who could initiat genocide at will but had themselves been subjected to that very horror so recently in history, that it was the impetus of the Israeli government to end the tension and not that of the scattered PLO suicide fruitcake.
I personally believe that on both sides of the conflict, there are men in power who do not seek an end to the violence and death -- they seek a genocide, one which they can legitimise through the vilification of the enemy.
Just my own $ 0.02 .
Since you spent time studying Israel and know it's history would you mind weighing in on what you think the result would have been had the Israelis accepted grand island as a homeland, or why you suppose they did not? Or why the Balfour Declaration and it's subsequent British (and French) mandates on the disposal of land and peoples outside of Britain (and France) are valid? Also, any suggestion as to what would finally bring about an end to the conflict? You obviously admire Israel and must be pained to see so many innocents die, and even if you utterly detest the Palestinians you can't seriously wish for them to simply be exterminated as a means to the end of peace.
Phaedrus
when will the day come when the good ol' U.S.A stop sticking there nose in everybody's business? I was in favor of the 1991 gulf war because of the fact that Iraq was the bully picking on smaller Kuwait and weak Saudi Arabia.The fight against Milosevic in Yugoslavia was also justified considering he was having a holocaust of his own.This war against Saddam had to happen for the well-being of this world.Hussein is crazy and with power the guy would've fought to take over half of the arab countries.Good job to all the allied soldiers that have basically won this war. What people don't realize is that the U.S is constantly defending a country that is democratic but plays the hidden game of terrorism:ISRAEL. Sharon is about as evil-hearted as Hussein,Kim Jong2 and Arafat;all of them want to dominate the weak,that's there pill of Exctasy.This factor has plenty of consecuences for all these murderers,just look at Saddam,running from the only superpower there is,can't run for long.Pretty soon Arafat will be gone and Kim Jong is most likely the next target.BUT WHAT ABOUT SHARON? Who will put this piece of sh*t in his place.probablly NO ONE. The U.S is his shield,the U.S is protecting a criminal and along with that more resentment from Syria,Iran,Libya,Pakistan,India,Lebanon and even our occasional allies like Saudi Arabia and Jordan are starting to dislike the U.S policy on Israel.One day the world will be a more peaceful place,but with Sharon leading the way in the middle-east.........GOOD LUCK
Costa rican-you import!
Sharon is doing all of us favor getting rid of PALIES that are useless and not even wanted by their TOWEL HEAD buddies.Israel deosn't start fights, they finish them with DEATH!
Sharon does the Suddam thing-----------Rid the Palies and we will be at peace!
Carona anybody?
Sharon is doing all of us favor getting rid of PALIES that are useless and not even wanted by their TOWEL HEAD buddies.Israel deosn't start fights, they finish them with DEATH!
Sharon does the Suddam thing-----------Rid the Palies and we will be at peace!
Carona anybody?
CR Mouth:
Put shit in, get shit out.
So, who put this shit in you?
Put shit in, get shit out.
So, who put this shit in you?
radio: how do you excel at twisting meaning so well???
Frank meant it metaphorically - nowhere did his statement imply either that good always wins nor that when evil does, they are 'correct'. It was simply an expression about how he felt about the moral standings of both sides. But I'll answer that: go ask the North Koreans and the Cambodians and the Rwandans and those in the Congo and the Kurds and the East Germans and those old enough in Russia to remember to purges and have a nice cup of tea with them, and chat about whether they considered their killers and torturers to be 'correct' because during their reign they 'won' (or are winning).
Frank meant it metaphorically - nowhere did his statement imply either that good always wins nor that when evil does, they are 'correct'. It was simply an expression about how he felt about the moral standings of both sides. But I'll answer that: go ask the North Koreans and the Cambodians and the Rwandans and those in the Congo and the Kurds and the East Germans and those old enough in Russia to remember to purges and have a nice cup of tea with them, and chat about whether they considered their killers and torturers to be 'correct' because during their reign they 'won' (or are winning).
Here is my problem with this whole thing:
Most think the following:
"We won. Therefore are casus belli is justified."
But war is never supposed to be justified afterwards; it should be justified before the conflict takes place.
[This message was edited by radiofreecostarica on 04-10-03 at 07:10 PM.]
Most think the following:
"We won. Therefore are casus belli is justified."
But war is never supposed to be justified afterwards; it should be justified before the conflict takes place.
[This message was edited by radiofreecostarica on 04-10-03 at 07:10 PM.]
had the Israeli councils accepted the incredibly generous offer of Grand Island, New York as an autonomous Jewish state. Grand Island is the world's largest freshwater island, and considering it's proximity to commerce and cultural centers of North America such as New York, Chicago and Toronto, a Jewish culture established there at the time (late 19th century) would no doubt today rival some of the world's great cities.
did a google search for "Israelis + Grand + Island + eli + avivi" but came up with very little except the island was 27 sq m and avivi purchased same in 1825. doesn't seem big enough to hold too many jews.
can you provide a URL?
did a google search for "Israelis + Grand + Island + eli + avivi" but came up with very little except the island was 27 sq m and avivi purchased same in 1825. doesn't seem big enough to hold too many jews.
can you provide a URL?
