What Am I Missing? - Israel and Hamas (Palestinians)

[Mick-Boy]

Different time, and believe it or not (you probably won't) Hiroshima saved many more lives than it took, on both sides... inevitably we would have invaded the Japanese mainland and that would have been much worse.

Thanks for the shot across the bow. I appreciate the education on WW2 history too. I wonder what the Japanese perspective would have been...

Your statement was "The perspective of the world is that killing innocents to gain ground on a political means is wrong." Are we now qualifying that with "unless it probably save more lives than we take"?

Let's have a little intellectual honesty here.

No, since Israel was Jewish sovereign territory long before it was occupied by the Palestinians (see: Roman history). And the UN declared that land theirs after WWII after how many years of them waiting for their homeland to be returned? Many Jewish (and Christian) holy sites in modern day Israel out dates Islam.

How far back do we get to go? Re-drawing maps will be fun once we start looking at who used to be somewhere.

Go back and READ UN resolution 181 (I linked to it on pg 6) before you try to tell anyone what the UN did or didn't say.

Big difference between tyranny and them just pissed because the rightful owners got their land back.

Who are we talking about? Are we back to Israel/Palestine or is this a terrorism in general kind of discussion?

You do realize that US interests include global cooperation and alliances right? Otherwise I do truly think you need to go back and re-take some US and World History. Being an isolationist country would probably be the worst thing we could do right now, or ever.

BINGO. The US also has alliances with Arab countries and we require their cooperation to maintain the status quo. Isolating ourselves from them over Israel would not be in our interests.

[Zundfolge]

Lots of interesting info here

[Ronin13]

Thanks for the shot across the bow. I appreciate the education on WW2 history too. I wonder what the Japanese perspective would have been...

Your statement was "The perspective of the world is that killing innocents to gain ground on a political means is wrong." Are we now qualifying that with "unless it probably save more lives than we take"?


Well the Japanese perspective really doesn't matter because I'm sure they'd say it wasn't right, but would see the reason in the end if they actually thought about it. It ended a war that could have gone on for many more years, so anyone's logical perspective would be that it did more harm than good. It's a shame that innocents had to die, but if you look at the actual facts Hiroshima and Nagasaki were to the Japanese war machine in the same regard that Henry Ford was to the auto industry... doing what we did, innocent casualties aside (although the entire country was being groomed to kill as many American invaders as possible if we entered the mainland) would have brought the Japanese war industry to it's knees, so the target wasn't civilians, it was both their military industry and their psyche which worked pretty well because they signed an unconditional surrender- then we went in and rebuilt their nation! How's that for integrity?

Who are we talking about? Are we back to Israel/Palestine or is this a terrorism in general kind of discussion?

I was speaking on Israel/Palestine, since you know, Jewish and Christian holy sites in the region are, as I said, older than Islam as a belief, not just the Islamic holy sites.


BINGO. The US also has alliances with Arab countries and we require their cooperation to maintain the status quo. Isolating ourselves from them over Israel would not be in our interests.

I never said we didn't have Arab allies- in fact, we've been friends with the Kingdom of Saud since the early 1930s. The bare bone facts are, terrorism and freedom fighting (and American Revolutionary Patriotism) are separate things. I saw in another post you're in Afghanistan, so you of all people know who the real enemy is, and you know it's wrong to say that terrorists have any "just" means to achieving their unjust ends.

[CMP_5.56]

So EXACTLY what is the difference between a Terrorist and a freedom fighter, if not perspective?



Lemme guess, Is it that they are fighting against what they believe is destroying their way of life or liberties? Religious Ideology?

Is it that a freedom Fighter will stay in their own country to fight?


Funny how when the USSR invaded Afghanistan and when the CIA helped the Mujaheddin repel in foreign invaders they were called..........

sorry? Couldn't hear you?

Perspective... at THAT time, they were fighting for what WE wanted....



(This is in no way an endorsement for acts of violence or war against the United States, interests thereof, nor should be taken as such. All statements made are to illustrate the concept of perspective as it relates to historical confrontation. Just so no one gets their feelings hurt.)

I see the line between terrorist and freedom fighter as the ability to wage ear against yoyr enemy without purposely targeting civilians.

I do not think the world is black and white, there are many shades of grey, but targeting civilians in my eyes is what makes a terrorist. There will always be collateral damage in large scale wars, the determining factor is what the intended target was.

When you look at the actions of these organizations around the world, one thing always comes inyo play. They are always places where a large amount of civilians gather.

Defending your country, or the base right of everyone to be free by means of guerilla tactics is not the same as targeting civilians to try and kill as many of them as you can.

[Mick-Boy]

Well the Japanese perspective really doesn't matter because I'm sure they'd say it wasn't right, but would see the reason in the end if they actually thought about it. It ended a war that could have gone on for many more years, so anyone's logical perspective would be that it did more harm than good. It's a shame that innocents had to die, but if you look at the actual facts Hiroshima and Nagasaki were to the Japanese war machine in the same regard that Henry Ford was to the auto industry... doing what we did, innocent casualties aside (although the entire country was being groomed to kill as many American invaders as possible if we entered the mainland) would have brought the Japanese war industry to it's knees, so the target wasn't civilians, it was both their military industry and their psyche which worked pretty well because they signed an unconditional surrender- then we went in and rebuilt their nation! How's that for integrity?

The Japanese perspective doesn't matter? Interesting. Is that because we were saving American (and Japanese lives) and we won?

How does Dresden fit in here?

I was speaking on Israel/Palestine, since you know, Jewish and Christian holy sites in the region are, as I said, older than Islam as a belief, not just the Islamic holy sites.

Ah. You threw me when you included AQ since they have nothing to do with Israel/Palestine. So your perspective is that having an older claim gives the right to take and hold land?

I never said we didn't have Arab allies- in fact, we've been friends with the Kingdom of Saud since the early 1930s. The bare bone facts are, terrorism and freedom fighting (and American Revolutionary Patriotism) are separate things.

Again, this depends on your perspective. Would you consider the Haganah to be a terrorist organization? What about the Lehi or the Irgun?

I'd be willing to be Israelis consider them freedom fighters but their tactics sure sound like tactics of a terrorist organization.

I saw in another post you're in Afghanistan, so you of all people know who the real enemy is, and you know it's wrong to say that terrorists have any "just" means to achieving their unjust ends.

I see we're back to a general discussion of terrorism now. OK.

On the contrary. I would say that most terrorists are using unjust means to achieve what they view as just ends.

Underestimating these people's belief in the inherent righteousness of their cause is a very, very foolish mistake.

To quote a man I like to read;
"So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself."

Understanding perspective is key. Failure to do so is ignorant and dangerous when lives are on the line.

[Mick-Boy]

Lots of interesting info here

It's a bit one sided but it's also pretty accurate historically. Not a bad overview if you take it with a grain of salt.

[bameverden]

Look at Israels past....they always win. They are the chosen people...I'd want them on my side.

[Mick-Boy]

Look at Israels past....they always win. They are the chosen people...I'd want them on my side.

Always? You must not be looking as far back as Ronin.

[CMP_5.56]

Look at Israels past....they always win. They are the chosen people...I'd want them on my side.

There is a lot of truth to this statement. When an entire race of people beleive they can not be defeated, they won't be. I don't agree with the tactics of either side, and I dont support this conflict in anyway. I dont care if we work with both aides, but we better be aware of how things may go if we ever turn our back on Israel.

[Ronin13]

Always? You must not be looking as far back as Ronin.

Egypt, Rome, Byzantine, and Persian... all pushed the Jews out, however, they came back. The Israelites are like the Rocky Balboa of the world, you can beat them down, but they'll get right back up.