Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
21 Egyptians beheaded in latest video
Options
Comments
-
I'm not oversimplifying. If the US hadn't smashed the region to bits and created a militarised vacuum over a decade, chances are these muppets wouldn't have come to any sort of prominence. Likewise, Libya was untroubled by Islamic fundamentalists for decades and within a couple of years of destabilisation they are now major actors in the country. It isn't a massive extrapolation to say that invasions and destabilisations will lead to dangerous loopers emerging.
It's a serious point? Why does a Middle Eastern life mean less than a Western one? A human being is a human being and every death is a tragedy. Especially those people killed needlessly in wars started over imperialist greed.
I'm aware of that fact, and I oppose colonialism and imperialism.
That explains the long stretch of peace the middle east saw, right until the USA came in and ruined everything, right?0 -
That explains the long stretch of peace the middle east saw, right until the USA came in and ruined everything, right?
It was relatively peaceable. I mean the Israelis occasionally fought with their arab neighbours, and Iran fought with Iraq, hard to see what danger that caused the West.0 -
Eugene Norman wrote: »It was relatively peaceable. I mean the Israelis occasionally fought with their arab neighbours, and Iran fought with Iraq, hard to see what danger that caused the West.
After the Saudis agreed to back the dollar with oil in return for military assistance, controlling the stability of the oil trade meant quite a lot to the West.0 -
IrishTrajan wrote: »The U.S. did what they did to protect their economic interests. The U.S. property bubble popped, and it brought the entire Western world into recession 7 years ago. You think that the petrodollar crashing wouldn't affect us and our lives?
I would add an addendum to your point about extremism. Low quality of living exacerbates extremism. We've seen it in Greece with the rise of Tsipras. Austerity and "low" (comparably) standards of living will lead to extremism.
The U.S. protecting the value of the dollar, and its economic viability as the world reserve currency through military force, arguably prevented extremism in the West.
The US by engaging in QE should, in fact, have reduced the price of the dollar. The collapse of which, by the way, would affect Americans and not Europeans. The West is not monolithic. However, given the power of the reserve currency it didn't collapse.
on the general point, clearly we are not safer than we were when the Yanks started bombing the bejusus out of places with no WMD whatsoever. We are much worse off. The Yanks have managed to radicalise a significant proportion of European muslims into a frenzy of hatred towards the West, even Europe, even though the countries involved didn't engage or opposed the war. Draining the swamp my ass.0 -
IrishTrajan wrote: »After the Saudis agreed to back the dollar with oil in return for military assistance, controlling the stability of the oil trade meant quite a lot to the West.
This is generally tin foil hat brigade. It really doesn't matter if oil is priced in dollars, euros, rupees, or frankfurters. If a currency is the reserve currency then that currency will be used to buy oil for the most, but not the only, part. In fact the euro is used to buy oil. As is the rupee. People think that pricing in dollars means selling only in dollars. It doesn't
And the saudis have clearly acted against American interests in opening the floodgates in the recent past.0 -
Advertisement
-
That explains the long stretch of peace the middle east saw, right until the USA came in and ruined everything, right?
This is a silly post to be honest. Regarding the immediate point of discussion, i.e. ISIS in Iraq; people like that were an insignificant and minor force in a stable and secular state prior to the invasion. After the US invaded the place illegally and ruined the country entirely, these people came to prominence. That's a pretty fair assessment.
If you want to bring the wider Middle East into play, you could look at examples such as sponsoring sides in the Iran-Iraq War, unilateral support for Israel as well as support for despots that also contribute to making the Middle East a pretty f*cked up place.
Trajan,The U.S. did what they did to protect their economic interests. The U.S. property bubble popped, and it brought the entire Western world into recession 7 years ago. You think that the petrodollar crashing wouldn't affect us and our lives?
I would add an addendum to your point about extremism. Low quality of living exacerbates extremism. We've seen it in Greece with the rise of Tsipras. Austerity and "low" (comparably) standards of living will lead to extremism.
I'm sorry but this just comes across as cheerleading an illegal invasion that caused untold carnage on the basis that the Americans somehow had a moral right to visit destruction on poor people half way across the world because it happened to be in their interest. Similarly, the fact they told a pack of lies to their own people and fabricated imaginary reasons to garner public support shows the morally spurious basis on which they invaded.The U.S. protecting the value of the dollar, and its economic viability as the world reserve currency through military force, arguably prevented extremism in the West.
Ha ha. Iraq War was necessary to stop the left coming to power is it?A Western life means more to me because they live the same way that I do, we speak English, we rely on each other economically, culturally, militarily. I have a greater affinity for my neighbours than I do people who do not live the same way we do. It's quite simple really.
I presume you're Irish, if so why would you place greater importance on the life of an American soldier than some Iraqi grandmother? That's ridiculous. I work with people from all over the world and have visited plenty of places which are much different to our own; funnily enough I have no problem accepting parity amongst the importance of human lives.
Boiled down, what you're saying is "who gives a f*ck about the brown Muslims out that direction as they're different to us." It's the worst of perspectives to have.0 -
Eugene Norman wrote: »The US by engaging in QE should, in fact, have reduced the price of the dollar. The collapse of which, by the way, would affect Americans and not Europeans. The West is not monolithic. However, given the power of the reserve currency it didn't collapse.
on the general point, clearly we are not safer than we were when the Yanks started bombing the bejusus out of places with no WMD whatsoever. We are much worse off. The Yanks have managed to radicalise a significant proportion of European muslims into a frenzy of hatred towards the West, even Europe, even though the countries involved didn't engage or opposed the war. Draining the swamp my ass.
Quantitative Easing != Financial Collapse. Fun fact: The dollar is trading at its strongest point since 9/11.
The U.S. is Ireland's largest trading partner, accounting for 21% of our total exports. You really think their economy dropping, or the purchasing power of the dollar dropping, won't affect us? Don't be so naive. A strong dollar benefits Ireland.
The Iranians were singing "death to the West" in the 80s, you really think that Islamification is only a result of U.S. meddling? Once again, don't be so naive.Eugene Norman wrote: »This is generally tin foil hat brigade. It really doesn't matter if oil is priced in dollars, euros, rupees, or frankfurters. If a currency is the reserve currency then that currency will be used to buy oil for the most, but not the only, part. In fact the euro is used to buy oil. As is the rupee. People think that pricing in dollars means selling only in dollars. It doesn't
And the saudis have clearly acted against American interests in opening the floodgates in the recent past.
Of course it matters. If it didn't, do you think NATO would've removed Gaddafi after he ceased his black market dealings, and his funding of terrorism, and halting his WMD ambitions? You really think the U.S. would've blown the Iraqis out of Kuwait in the 90s, or dismantled the entire Iraqi military hierarchy after the invasion in '03, if it wasn't of strategic and economic importance?
It isn't "tin foil hat", it is the history of the petrodollar. The U.S. didn't have their dollar pegged to anything. The Saudis and the Americans finalized the petrodollar agreement in 1973.0 -
I'm sorry but this just comes across as cheerleading an illegal invasion that caused untold carnage on the basis that the Americans somehow had a moral right to visit destruction on poor people half way across the world because it happened to be in their interest. Similarly, the fact they told a pack of lies to their own people and fabricated imaginary reasons to garner public support shows the morally spurious basis on which they invaded.
I'm explaining to you why they did what they did, even as a critic of the war. I'm being as unbiased as possible.Ha ha. Iraq War was necessary to stop the left coming to power is it?
You laugh about the left being extremist, but look at Sweden. Militant left-wing groups. Yes, that's right. Militant Left. Ridiculous, I know.
I was also referring to the rise of the Right. You know, the Golden Dawn, the second largest party in Greece? The same thing happened in Germany and Italy pre-ww2.I presume you're Irish, if so why would you place greater importance on the life of an American soldier than some Iraqi grandmother? That's ridiculous. I work with people from all over the world and have visited plenty of places which are much different to our own; funnily enough I have no problem accepting parity amongst the importance of human lives.
Because Ireland relies heavily on America. Who provides $225bn in DFI? The US. Who is Ireland's largest trading partner? The US.
And the fact that there are large populations of people claiming Irish heritage in America, Canada, U.K., Australia et al.Boiled down, what you're saying is "who gives a f*ck about the brown Muslims out that direction as they're different to us." It's the worst of perspectives to have.
Brown? Do not make me out to be some kind of racist, you left wing twit.
Did I say I don't care? No, I didn't. Of course I care. If I didn't I wouldn't be keeping up with the news, would I? I wouldn't feel anger when I watch videos of men being shot, beheaded, burned alive, stoned to death, blown to pieces. I wouldn't feel untempered rage when I watch children being indoctrinated into their way of life, would I? Don't make me out to be some right wing fascistic bastard just so you can jack off your own moral position, you condescending asshat.
Of course I care. I just care about Western lives more.0 -
You laugh about the left being extremist, but look at Sweden. Militant left-wing groups. Yes, that's right. Militant Left. Ridiculous, I know.
There's a few youngfellas going around getting into scraps with skinhead types. It isn't a harbinger of governmental collapse.Did I say I don't care? No, I didn't. Of course I care. If I didn't I wouldn't be keeping up with the news, would I? I wouldn't feel anger when I watch videos of men being shot, beheaded, burned alive, stoned to death, blown to pieces. I wouldn't feel untempered rage when I watch children being indoctrinated into their way of life, would I? Don't make me out to be some right wing fascistic bastard just so you can jack off your own moral position, you condescending asshat.
Of course I care. I just care about Western lives more.
It's hilarious you're throwing a total hissy-fit over me pointing out the reality of what you're saying. You say you prioritise American lives over the lives of others in the Middle-East, despite you not coming from either area. You placing more emphasis on the lives of American soldiers etc rather than acknowledging the basic fact that all human lives have parity does a bang a bit of fascism to be honest. Personally I don't think one human being has any worth over another because they happen to have the same culture as me. Probably because I'm not a lunatic.0 -
There's a few youngfellas going around getting into scraps with skinhead types. It isn't a harbinger of governmental collapse.
A lot of the people they target aren't promoting fascism or right-wing ideology. I guess violence is okay so long as it doesn't compromise political correctness?It's hilarious you're throwing a total hissy-fit over me pointing out the reality of what you're saying. You say you prioritise American lives over the lives of others in the Middle-East, despite you not coming from either area. You placing more emphasis on the lives of American soldiers etc rather than acknowledging the basic fact that all human lives have parity does a bang a bit of fascism to be honest. Personally I don't think one human being has any worth over another because they happen to have the same culture as me. Probably because I'm not a lunatic.
I'm not throwing a hissy fit. You're resorting to slandering me because you can't argue the point. You're disregarding the parts of my posts, and replying to ones you can claim the moral highground on.
Yes, I prioritize Western lives over Middle Eastern lives. Tell me, there's a neighbour who lives much the same way you do. He gets an altercation with a stranger over money, and both end up dying. The complete stranger just happens to have a different skin, which has no bearing on the premise under which they fought, merely superficial meaning. Who would you be more concerned with?
It's tribalism, a basic instinct in humanity. We're social creatures, arguing that because I care more about people like me, than people who aren't like me, makes me racist, is outright retarded.
Tell me; our conversation stemmed from me saying the West shouldn't put boots on the ground... What would you have us do? Grab the Americans by their scruff and throw them back into the pit? Bomb America for what they did? Jump in ourselves?
Oh, that's right, we're arguing the same point, you just couldn't help but get a snide remark in because your ego needed to be jerked. Take a hike.0 -
Advertisement
-
A lot of the people they target aren't promoting fascism or right-wing ideology. I guess violence is okay so long as it doesn't compromise political correctness
I said that they are hardly a threat to political stability in Sweden, they're a small street-based group that hops off other small, street-based groups. They aren't a signal of massive destabilisation in Scandinavia or anything.I'm not throwing a hissy fit.
You are mate, firing insults such as "asshat" and "twit" (which are pretty sh*te as insults go) to total strangers on the internet is a bit silly to be honest.Yes, I prioritize Western lives over Middle Eastern lives. Tell me, there's a neighbour who lives much the same way you do. He gets an altercation with a stranger over money, and both end up dying. The complete stranger just happens to have a different skin, which has no bearing on the premise under which they fought, merely superficial meaning. Who would you be more concerned with?
I have neighbours from all over the world lad, on my road there are hijab-wearing Muslims, Indian Sikhs, Brits, an elderly Italian couple, a Jamaican family and a house full of taciturn Poles who chain-smoke joints in their front yard while drinking crap lager. I don't look around at them and start to prioritise who I should have greater affinity with because of their cultural background when I don't really know any of them.
Disregarding your example and bringing it back to the point at hand; do I place greater emphasis on a life of an American or British soldier than I do someone from the Middle-East? No, I don't. Because that's a ridiculous way to think. I work with Bengali Muslims and box with Iraqis, Iranians, Kurds and Afghans. I don't view them in a lesser category or believe I should automatically have less affinity with them than I do an American.It's tribalism, a basic instinct in humanity. We're social creatures, arguing that because I care more about people like me, than people who aren't like me, makes me racist, is outright retarded.
What's retarded is you claiming "affinity" with complete strangers because they happen to be from Oklahoma or Florida as opposed to Baghdad. It's an insular and stupid way of thinking.0 -
I said that they are hardly a threat to political stability in Sweden, they're a small street-based group that hops off other small, street-based groups. They aren't a signal of massive destabilisation in Scandinavia or anything.
They are representative. Did you know that the SD, a right wing party, is Sweden's second largest party with approx. 17% of the vote? I guess that isn't representative of the people though. Of course not. Who votes based on shared ideology. That's crazy... -_-You are mate, firing insults such as "asshat" and "twit" (which are pretty sh*te as insults go) to total strangers on the internet is a bit silly to be honest.
So if you insult me, it's fine. If I insult you, I'm angry. Oh joy, arguing with children is so exciting.0I have neighbours from all over the world lad, on my road there are hijab-wearing Muslims, Indian Sikhs, Brits, an elderly Italian couple, a Jamaican family and a house full of taciturn Poles who chain-smoke joints in their front yard while drinking crap lager. I don't look around at them and start to prioritise who I should have greater affinity with because of their cultural background when I don't really know any of them.
They live in the West, they work in the West, they are members of the Western way of life. I have a greater affinity for them, than I do their family who remained in the Middle East. I never said I hated a specific group of people, I said I prefer those living in the West to those living in the Middle East. I have Muslim friends, I have Syrian friends, I have Canadian friends, I have Swedish, and American, and British, and Australian, and Polish and Estonian friends... Does that mean I'm racist, because I care more about people who live in the West than I do people who don't?
You're so anti-American you're becoming illogical. WE ARE ON THE SAME SIDE. You just can't help but try to gain the moral high ground.Disregarding your example and bringing it back to the point at hand; do I place greater emphasis on a life of an American or British soldier than I do someone from the Middle-East? No, I don't. Because that's a ridiculous way to think. I work with Bengali Muslims and box with Iraqis, Iranians, Kurds and Afghans. I don't view them in a lesser category or believe I should automatically have less affinity with them than I do an American.
You see, there we differ. I do care about British and American soldiers, because when they go to war, they're not going out with the intention of fighting for an oligarch or a hegemonic power... They are fighting for the West. That is what they signed up for, to protect their country, their allies and our way of life.What's retarded is you claiming "affinity" with complete strangers because they happen to be from Oklahoma or Florida as opposed to Baghdad. It's an insular and stupid way of thinking.
Yes, me having an affinity with someone who shares cultural, economic, social and political ties rather than someone who I don't share any of that with... Yes, that's insular and stupid.
It's not where they are from, it's where they are. The Americans and Europeans who joined ISIS? I don't care for them, they aren't Westerners any more. The Muslims who moved here to escape that bull****? Yes, I care for them more than I do the whites who fled to the Middle East.
That's what you're not getting. I'm not being racist, I'm being a realist, I'm being pragmatic.
Now, answer my question. What do you want us to do? This argument stemmed from me saying America shouldn't be the world police and shouldn't put troops back in Iraq. What would you have us do? Force the Yanky-doodles and the Brits back into those countries?
You can ignore the question if you wish... I'll just not reply to any of your further posts until you do answer it.
I'll even put it in big bold letters so you don't miss it.0 -
So if you insult me, it's fine. If I insult you, I'm angry. Oh joy, arguing with children is so exciting.0
I didn't insult you. I said your valuing the lives of one person over another because you're of the same background as them has a bizarre ring to it. As I said, the importance of human life is absolute regardless of what culture, race, religion or background they come from.I said I prefer those living in the West to those living in the Middle East
Funnily enough I've been all over the Islamic world and have stayed with Muslim families in Morocco, Palestine, Jordan, Turkey, Kurdistan and Bangladesh and shock horror, at their core they largely have the same needs, desires, dreams etc that we do. People are people mate, I've met lovely people in Ramallah who I consider friends and total c*nts in Cork where I'm from. Erecting these preconditions on the value of someone's life because of where they're from or where they live is f*cking stupid. End of story really.You're so anti-American you're becoming illogical.
I'm not anti-American. I'm anti-imperialist.You see, there we differ. I do care about British and American soldiers, because when they go to war, they're not going out with the intention of fighting for an oligarch or a hegemonic power... They are fighting for the West. That is what they signed up for, to protect their country, their allies and our way of life.
I sympathise with the largely working-class young people who buy into misguided notions of patriotism and defending democracy and then get sent out to fight and die for oil supremacy, imperialism and the likes of Haliburton. However, I don't prioritise their lives any more than I do those of their victims, i.e. the countless civilians they killed in pursuit of an unjust war.
James Connolly had the right perspective on this a century ago, working people (often poor) who go out and kill similar people due to the interests of the rich.Now, answer my question. What do you want us to do? This argument stemmed from me saying America shouldn't be the world police and shouldn't put troops back in Iraq. What would you have us do? Force the Yanky-doodles and the Brits back into those countries?
They should accept responsibility for destabilising the region on a massive basis with their invasion of Iraq. They should cease any and all interference in Syria for a start. They should end their policy of toppling governments at a whim when they believe it to be expedient á la Libya. They should also end unilateral support for Israel and try and bed down that particular crisis with the creation of a Palestinian state which would go a long way to bringing some sort of stability.0 -
They should accept responsibility for destabilising the region on a massive basis with their invasion of Iraq. They should cease any and all interference in Syria for a start. They should end their policy of toppling governments at a whim when they believe it to be expedient á la Libya. They should also end unilateral support for Israel and try and bed down that particular crisis with the creation of a Palestinian state which would go a long way to bringing some sort of stability.
So, we should just let ISIS massacre people wantonly? I guess those Coptic Egyptians deserved to get beheaded, they must've been too pro-West, right? Well, aside from Egypt's falling out with the U.S., and their Ba'athist idealism.
Palestine would bring stability? Are you off your god damned rocker? IT WAS THE PALESTINIANS WHO STARTED THE BLOODY WAR. That Khartoum Resolution, the closing of the Suez to Israel... That's all Israels fault? The fact that when Britain held the British Mandate of Palestine, when they were talking about leaving, and the Arabs started massacring the Jews, causing the Jews to retaliate... That was all the Jews fault?
How can you argue for America to accept responsibility for their actions in Iraq, then blatantly ignore the fact it was Palestine's fault that they're in this predicament in the first place?!
Before you get your panties in a bunch, no I'm not defending Israel, they're as batsh1te crazy as their neighbours, but to blame it all on one side is farcical.
You're not anti-Imperialist, because you're wantonly excusing the imperialism of an Arab State that caused their current problem. You're anti-Western Imperialist.0 -
You can be sure if George Dubya was still about he would wipe these maniacs off the face of the earth.0
-
-
So, we should just let ISIS massacre people wantonly? I guess those Coptic Egyptians deserved to get beheaded, they must've been too pro-West, right? Well, aside from Egypt's falling out with the U.S., and their Ba'athist idealism.
No mate. ISIS are to blame for beheading those poor men. But as I said above, these lunatics were largely unheard of in Libya before Ghadaffi was toppled. Again we were told packs of lies and sold a false narrative about glorious rebels against an evil tyrant and now Libya has gone from being a stable, secular and reasonably prosperous place into a basket-case controlled by various "governments" and Islamic fundamentalists. As Owen Jones said, it was "liberated into the hands of ISIS". Yet again another example about how such interference neither helps the people in these countries nor the average citizen of Europe.Palestine would bring stability? Are you off your god damned rocker?
A Palestinian state and an end to an injustice that has become a totem in the Islamic world from Morocco to Indonesia would probably be a big help in stabilising the region, yes. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict is a major factor in Middle East destabilisation and a calming (relatively) of that situation would go a long way. The only realistic way that's going to happen is with the foundation of a Palestinian state.IT WAS THE PALESTINIANS WHO STARTED THE BLOODY WAR
Lulz. They systematically stripped themselves of their own homeland and threw themselves off their land did they? The devious bastards.The fact that when Britain held the British Mandate of Palestine, when they were talking about leaving, and the Arabs started massacring the Jews, causing the Jews to retaliate... That was all the Jews fault?
What are you on about? The British decided to allocate the majority of Palestine to Jewish immigrants and basically dispossess the Palestinian people due to European anti-Semitism they had no hand or part in.How can you argue for America to accept responsibility for their actions in Iraq, then blatantly ignore the fact it was Palestine's fault that they're in this predicament in the first place?!
Total and utter nonsense to be honest and the usual victim-blaming we often hear on that particular issue. A people who had their land robbed from under them and now find themselves ghettoised and cantonised in their own country.You're not anti-Imperialist, because you're wantonly excusing the imperialism of an Arab State that caused their current problem. You're anti-Western Imperialist
The Palestinians are imperialist?? I was thinking earlier on you were a bit cracked but I'm sure of the fact now.0 -
In a video released by Islamic State a group of Egyptian Christian men in orange jumpsuits are forced to kneel in row on a rocky beach with their backs to the sea while men dressed form the head to toe in back stand behind them with knives in their scabbards. A man clad in camouflage fatigues in the center of the row with his face also masked waves a combat dagger as he warns Europe that ISIS will conquer Rome.
The link below shows all 21 men being beheaded. The men kneel with their hands bound behind their backs and are pushed forward while their killers cut their throats and saw through their necks the screams and gurgling death gasps dying away until they place their severed heads with sandy covered faces and open eyes clearly visible on their backs.
A lingering shot shows the sea foaming red along the sea shore.
http://www.infobae.com/2015/02/15/1627000-el-estado-islamico-difundio-la-decapitacion-21-rehenes-egipcios-libia
How long before Europe wakes up?0 -
-
Threads merged.0
-
Advertisement
-
A Palestinian state and an end to an injustice that has become a totem in the Islamic world from Morocco to Indonesia would probably be a big help in stabilising the region, yes. The Israeli/Palestinian conflict is a major factor in Middle East destabilisation and a calming (relatively) of that situation would go a long way. The only realistic way that's going to happen is with the foundation of a Palestinian state.
Yea, a totem. "If you start a war, lose, become part of Jordan and then start the war again, we won't take any steps to reprimanding you".Lulz. They systematically stripped themselves of their own homeland and threw themselves off their land did they? The devious bastards.
What are you on about? The British decided to allocate the majority of Palestine to Jewish immigrants and basically dispossess the Palestinian people due to European anti-Semitism they had no hand or part in.
You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?
In 1856, the Ottoman Empire issued a reform edict giving equal rights to all subjects (including the Jews/Zionists in Palestine). The Muslims wanted to retain the right to keep the Jews as Dhimmi, as subordinate citizens to the Muslims. When they realized the Jews didn't want to be second-class citizens, and instead wanted a homeland, they protested Jews buying land. Buying, not stealing. Both sides became more and more aggressive in their rhetoric, though the Jews believed that Britain would deal with the Arabs, the Arabs wanted to deal with the Jews.
Skip ahead: In 1948, Palestine declared war on Israel. Israel won.
In 1956, Egypt closed the Suez and blockaded Israel, in violation of the 1949 treaty, and the Constantinople Convention of 1888. In 1964, the PLO declared they would "destroy Zionist presence" in Palestine, and war erupted in 1967. The Khartoum Resolution (no peace, no negotiation, no israel) was announced. Israel won the war. In 1969-1970 Egypt declared the War of Attrition. Israel won. In 1973, Syria and Egypt (with support from Iraq) declared the Yom Kippur War. Israel won.
In the Oslo Accords, the Americans put forward peace deals. The Israelis were open to negotiating (at the Camp David Summit), the Palestinians didn't even offer a yes or no to whether it could be negotiated, nor did they offer counter proposals.
But I'm sure it's all Israel's fault. Those pesky Jews and their land grabbing!Total and utter nonsense to be honest and the usual victim-blaming we often hear on that particular issue. A people who had their land robbed from under them and now find themselves ghettoised and cantonised in their own country.
If a criminal breaks into a house and the owner beats the crap out of him, is the owner in the wrong? No. You punish transgressions. But because Palestine isn't the West, critical analysis is fascist, right-wing, and imperialist, right?
Palestine started the war. They suffered the cost of losing that war.The Palestinians are imperialist?? I was thinking earlier on you were a bit cracked but I'm sure of the fact now.
So, pursuing Western hegemony over a region amounts to imperialism. Arab pursuits to remove Jews from the land, and install their own hegemony doesn't constitute imperialism?
Your left-wing hand wringing is disgusting. You're excusing acts of violence from Arabs to protect "their land" which was "stolen" as you said, while you are condemning Israel actually defending their home in several wars, and of U.S. protecting its vital lifelines (the oil trade) as "imperialist" and "unneeded".
You're a troglodyte, willfully ignorant and holding the West to a double standard. You sir, are what we call a libtard. That's a liberal retard.0 -
You're having a giraffe mate. It's the same typical bullsh*t I often hear from people who defend the worst elements of American imperialism and the nonsense that goes with it; an effort to appear reasonable followed by defending the indefensible in the name of pragmatism or realpolitik. Only this time you've interspersed it with charming assertions about the superior value of Western lives.Skip ahead: In 1948, Palestine declared war on Israel. Israel won.
B*llocks. The Brits allocated over half of Palestine (including all of the best land) to recent Jewish immigrants despite them being around a quarter of the population. In other words, Palestinians were to lose 60% of their country due to anti-Semitism in Europe they had no hand or part in. After the foundation of Israel, Palestinians were expelled at gunpoint by Jewish paramilitaries and this was the start of the refugee crisis we see in the area today.In the Oslo Accords, the Americans put forward peace deals.
At Oslo, the PLO recognised Israel and acknoweledged its right to exist. All they have gotten in return is more of their land stolen from them, hundreds of illegal settlements and the cantonisation of their country.Palestine started the war. They suffered the cost of losing that war.
They handed over 60% of their country to European immigrants and then turfed themselves off their own land? Nonsense again.Your left-wing hand wringing is disgusting. You're excusing acts of violence from Arabs to protect "their land" which was "stolen" as you said, while you are condemning Israel actually defending their home in several wars, and of U.S. protecting its vital lifelines (the oil trade) as "imperialist" and "unneeded".
This is actually gas. The US illegally invading a sovereign country predicated on a lie in order to secure their own interests, killing untold civilians in the process, is simply protecting a lifeline; while the real imperialists are a poor and dispossessed Palestinian people who are being oppressed by a nuclear-armed modern military.
You'd want to go away and look up the definition of imperialism lad if you think people living in refugee camps and powerless cantons are "imperialists."You're a troglodyte, willfully ignorant and holding the West to a double standard. You sir, are what we call a libtard. That's a liberal retard.
Libtard? Troglodyte? It doesn't take a big man to spout off insults from behind a screen lad. And yet again you revert to the sh*ttest insults imaginable and sound like a spotty university debating type in the process. I'd have more respect for you if you just plain called me a c*nt.0 -
You're having a giraffe mate. It's the same typical bullsh*t I often hear from people who defend the worst elements of American imperialism and the nonsense that goes with it; an effort to appear reasonable followed by defending the indefensible in the name of pragmatism or realpolitik. Only this time you've interspersed it with charming assertions about the superior value of Western lives.
Yes, me being reasonable is clearly nonsensical. Would you ever cop on, you amadán.B*llocks. The Brits allocated over half of Palestine (including all of the best land) to recent Jewish immigrants despite them being around a quarter of the population. In other words, Palestinians were to lose 60% of their country due to anti-Semitism in Europe they had no hand or part in. After the foundation of Israel, Palestinians were expelled at gunpoint by Jewish paramilitaries and this was the start of the refugee crisis we see in the area today.
"had no hand or part in"... So, they didn't want to keep the Jews as dhimmi. They didn't start a civil unrest campaign and murdered Jews? Get your head out of your ass, Palestine started that conflict.At Oslo, the PLO recognised Israel and acknoweledged its right to exist. All they have gotten in return is more of their land stolen from them, hundreds of illegal settlements and the cantonisation of their country.
No, what they got in return for America tendering offers, and Israel announcing they are open to negotiations... They didn't even have the common decency to say yes, no, or offer a counter proposal. I suggest you read up.They handed over 60% of their country to European immigrants and then turfed themselves off their own land? Nonsense again.
Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it? Have you ever even read about the conflict?This is actually gas. The US illegally invading a sovereign country predicated on a lie in order to secure their own interests, killing untold civilians in the process, is simply protecting a lifeline; while the real imperialists are a poor and dispossessed Palestinian people who are being oppressed by a nuclear-armed modern military.
So, violence against an ethnic group is justified, when you want the land they bought, after you just fought several wars to take it by force? And when the group they were trying to massacre knocks them out, suddenly they person they are attacking is the bad guy?
Will you go away outta that, you fool.Libtard? Troglodyte? It doesn't take a big man to spout off insults from behind a screen lad. And yet again you revert to the sh*ttest insults imaginable and sound like a spotty university debating type in the process. I'd have more respect for you if you just plain called me a c*nt.
"a big man to spout off insults from behind a screen"... Did you seriously just use that "fight me in real life m8" argument? Jesus Christ you're stupid.
Just because someone uses sesquipedalian words (that's the big boy word that means "big boy words", so you know, little feller), doesn't mean those words are "sh*t". It means your vocabulary is lacking, my friends.
Ah, vulgarity. "When the argument isn't going your way, use the c-word for shock value".
Your posts are ignorant and superfluous, your personality is vapid and you lack critical thinking skills. I'm quite finished debating with you, good day.0 -
-
Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it? Have you ever even read about the conflict?
Yes mate I have. And I've actually been there too and spent some time with the people you seem to deem lesser human beings."a big man to spout off insults from behind a screen"... Did you seriously just use that "fight me in real life m8" argument? Jesus Christ you're stupid.
No lad, I didn't say that at all. I just said you sound silly when you spout bucket loads of hysterical insults from behind your computer and then lecture me about vulgarity.
As I suspected, you're frankly a bit of an oddball. I can only hope you don't conduct discussions in real life the same way.0 -
IrishTrajan wrote: »Yes, me being reasonable is clearly nonsensical. Would you ever cop on, you amadán.
"had no hand or part in"... So, they didn't want to keep the Jews as dhimmi. They didn't start a civil unrest campaign and murdered Jews? Get your head out of your ass, Palestine started that conflict.
No, what they got in return for America tendering offers, and Israel announcing they are open to negotiations... They didn't even have the common decency to say yes, no, or offer a counter proposal. I suggest you read up.
Reading comprehension isn't your strong suit, is it? Have you ever even read about the conflict?
So, violence against an ethnic group is justified, when you want the land they bought, after you just fought several wars to take it by force? And when the group they were trying to massacre knocks them out, suddenly they person they are attacking is the bad guy?
Will you go away outta that, you fool.
"a big man to spout off insults from behind a screen"... Did you seriously just use that "fight me in real life m8" argument? Jesus Christ you're stupid.
Just because someone uses sesquipedalian words (that's the big boy word that means "big boy words", so you know, little feller), doesn't mean those words are "sh*t". It means your vocabulary is lacking, my friends.
Ah, vulgarity. "When the argument isn't going your way, use the c-word for shock value".
Your posts are ignorant and superfluous, your personality is vapid and you lack critical thinking skills. I'm quite finished debating with you, good day.
Are you having a laugh? A hasbara couldnt have written a more blinkered view on the origins of the Israeli state. Let's just forget about Zionism and its aspirations shall we? There is quite a big difference between the immigrant jews buying land from Ottomans who didnt own the land to sell in the first place and the native jews who lived there for centuries. Israel was a colonial project and you have a problem with the colonized resisting??
As to Camp David... take your own advice? Do you even know what was offered and what the Palestinians agreed to accept??
have a read
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-122661390 -
Yes mate I have. And I've actually been there too and spent some time with the people you seem to deem lesser human beings.
Saying I said things I didn't, and that I believe things I don't. I couldn't have made it clearer. You can't refute a point, you revert to ad hominem. Bravo.No lad, I didn't say that at all. I just said you sound silly when you spout bucket loads of hysterical insults from behind your computer and then lecture me about vulgarity.
Yes, I'm the one who sounds silly here. The person who has played devil's advocate in logical and precise points... Not you, who has biased opinions as facts and runs with them, letting his emotions run his argument. Ok.As I suspected, you're frankly a bit of an oddball. I can only hope you don't conduct discussions in real life the same way.
I conduct myself how I wish to conduct myself, that's the great thing about living in the West. I don't risk having my head cut off for disagreeing with someone.
Also, your condescension is misguided. You think you have the intellectual and moral high ground, you don't. You're an idealist regurgitating left-wing drivel who thinks political party sizes can be dismissed, that money isn't a major contributor to extremism, that everything is the fault of the Jews and the Americans, while turning a blind eye to the transgressions of the people you are defending.
Quite a charming fellow, did you take part in the Shell-to-Sea protests, or the anti-water meter protest where the President was called a midget traitour? You strike me as one of those fellows, good sir.0 -
Yes mate I have. And I've actually been there too and spent some time with the people you seem to deem lesser human beings.
No lad, I didn't say that at all. I just said you sound silly when you spout bucket loads of hysterical insults from behind your computer and then lecture me about vulgarity.
As I suspected, you're frankly a bit of an oddball. I can only hope you don't conduct discussions in real life the same way.
I wouldnt waste your breath, his education on Israeli history is pretty similar to what Israeli's are thought at school... basically a pack of lies. They freak out when the veil is lifted0 -
Are you having a laugh? A hasbara couldnt have written a more blinkered view on the origins of the Israeli state. Let's just forget about Zionism and its aspirations shall we? There is quite a big difference between the immigrant jews buying land from Ottomans who didnt own the land to sell in the first place and the native jews who lived their for centuries. Israel was a colonial project and you have a problem with the colonized resisting??
As to Camp David... take your own advice? Do you even know what was offered and what the Palestinians agreed to accept??
have a read
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12266139
That link isn't referring to Camp David. It specifically states:"This is the first time in history that we make such a proposition," said the Palestinian negotiator Ahmed Qurei.
"We refused to do so in Camp David," he added,0 -
Advertisement
-
I wouldnt waste your breath, his education on Israeli history is pretty similar to what Israeli's are thought at school... basically a pack of lies. They freak out when the veil is lifted
I've said I'm not pro-Israeli. I actually find Israel's treatment of the Palestinians abhorrent. But to excuse the Palestinians for starting the wars, and the attempted genocide, and blame everything on Israel and some grand Zionist conspiracy, is totally and utterly foolish.0
Advertisement