Mid east

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote

should britain withdraw from northern ireland?

The majority of people in N.Ireland want to remain part of the United Kingdom. Not even comparable to Palestine.<span id='postcolor'>

What about sctoland, I thought they wanted to be independent, amI wrong? Besides why would N.Irelan want to be part of Britian?j/k

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ Sep. 03 2002,01:21)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote  

should britain withdraw from northern ireland?

The majority of people in N.Ireland want to remain part of the United Kingdom. Not even comparable to Palestine.<span id='postcolor'>

What about sctoland, I thought they wanted to be independent, amI wrong?  Besides why would N.Irelan want to be part of Britian?j/k <span id='postcolor'>

You are wrong. Scotish people are happily active members of the UK. why don't you find out alittle about what you are talking about before you post?

[Bernadotte 0]

But sometimes I wonder what might have happened had Scotland not signed away all rights to North Sea oil long ago.

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

I wak asking a question, now I know. Thanks.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

We seem to be squabling over who OWNS the land and who SHOULD be allowed to live there. I have a simple solution:both of them. Lets tear up all the holy land stuff and make it so everyone of all religions and political views are allowed to live in Israel and the countries around it.

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Sep. 02 2002,09:34)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I get it.  You think that the Palestinian response to brutal oppression is being judged with style points, separately from technical merit (like at a figure skating competition).  Sadly, I think you're right about that.<span id='postcolor'>

Actually, I'm making my judgment on STRICTLY "technical" (objective) merits, summarized by one question: Will the suicide bombings work? Answer: Not if the objective is to win a Palestinian homeland. The "style points" would be subjective factors such as self-defense vs. oppression, who owns the land, yadda yadda yadda. We could argue about "style" forever and nothing would change.

Semper Fi

[Tex -USMC- 0]

E6 has a definite point that the Palestinians use of ultra violent methods does nothing to help their cause. Black Americans would not have won their civil rights by fire bombing the Alabama bussing system, or shooting up segregated schools, restaraunts and theaters.

Their ability to stand in a nonviolent manner, instead of throwing a cultural temper tantrum to achieve their goals, shows a certain maturity that the Pals have consistently lacked. I know its hard to stand and turn the other cheek, but thats how you gain the sympathy and support from the international community that you seek.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Sep. 02 2002,07:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Any goodwill that might be generated by Palestinian protests NOT involving flying body parts (i.e. the "Attaboys") is overshadowed by counterproductive suicide attacks (i.e. the "Oh [hells]"). The "twisted perception of truth" angle is a separate issue.<span id='postcolor'>

Ok... then how do you regard the twisted perception of truth angle? ...Style or technical issue?

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Sep. 03 2002,06:03)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Ok... then how do you regard the twisted perception of truth angle?  ...Style or technical issue?<span id='postcolor'>

Style.

Semper Fi

[Paratrooper 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Sep. 03 2002,05:30)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">E6 has a definite point that the Palestinians use of ultra violent methods does nothing to help their cause. Black Americans would not have won their civil rights by fire bombing the Alabama bussing system, or shooting up segregated schools, restaraunts and theaters.

Their ability to stand in a nonviolent manner, instead of throwing a cultural temper tantrum to achieve their goals, shows a certain maturity that the Pals have consistently lacked. I know its hard to stand and turn the other cheek, but thats how you gain the sympathy and support from the international community that you seek.<span id='postcolor'>

But Black Americans hadn't had thier own country(or area) untill they were invaded and occupied. I know I would along with most other Britions resist forcefully any invasion and attempted occupation of British soil, it hasn't happened for nearly a thousand years but invaders would be resisted. Why does Palestine not have that right?

[von Schnitzel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 03 2002,12:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I know I would along with most other Britions resist forcefully any invasion and attempted occupation of British soil, it hasn't happened for nearly a thousand years but invaders would be resisted. Why does Palestine not have that right?<span id='postcolor'>

Of course they have the right. BUT what if the 'Operation Sea Lion' in 1940 was succesfull? German settlers would move to Kent and live there. Then British resistance movement would go about blowing buses full of German women, children and attack their homes and shoot those 'damn jerries'?

There's a big difference.

[Tex -USMC- 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Paratrooper @ Sep. 03 2002,12:50)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">But Black Americans hadn't had thier own country(or area) untill they were invaded and occupied. I know I would along with most other Britions resist forcefully any invasion and attempted occupation of British soil, it hasn't happened for nearly a thousand years but invaders would be resisted. Why does Palestine not have that right?<span id='postcolor'>

I fail to see a large difference between being treated like second class human beings for 400 plus years and what the Pals have to deal with.

[Col. Kurtz 0]

The diffrence between Britain under the 3rd Riech and Palestinia under Israel, is that religion is not a key player, nor is Britain the holy land for many religions. Religion is unfortunetly taken too serious over there. If they could accept each others religion and make it not a matter of who SHOULD be there. I think they shoudl both be there, and they should both be able to live in peace together without killing each other. I asm a dreamer.........

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Sep. 03 2002,05:15)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I'm making my judgment on STRICTLY "technical" (objective) merits...<span id='postcolor'>

And therefore your judgement pays no regard to any twisted perceptions of truth because those are style issues, right?

Some examples of twisted perceptions of truth:

- US voters/taxpayers like Sam Samson thinking that Palestine was unclaimed land in 1919 when the population was actually ~700,000.

- US voters/taxpayers like Duke of Ray thinking that the Palestinians could be forced from their 700 year old villages because it is God's will, which overrides international law.

- Nearly everyone thinking that the Balfour promise made by a European country to an international organisation about Palestine could supercede any of the aspirations of Palestine's native inhabitants.

- The founders of Israel thinking that unilaterally declaring statehood on half the land of Palestine against the wishes of its 1.3 million native inhabitants was legal (or for that matter, democratic).

etc... etc... etc...

If none of these classic twisted perceptions of truth ever enter into your judgement of the situation then I have only one more question to ask:  Are you also a US voter/taxpayer?

[Sam Samson 0]

so, dot. israel should undeclare statehood and just evaporate?

you ARE playing devil's advocate, I hope.

...or is somebody paying you for this?

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Sep. 03 2002,16:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">And therefore your judgement pays no regard to any twisted perceptions of truth because those are style issues, right?

Some examples of twisted perceptions of truth:

- US voters/taxpayers like Sam Samson thinking that Palestine was unclaimed land in 1919 when the population was actually ~700,000.

- US voters/taxpayers like Duke of Ray thinking that the Palestinians could be forced from their 700 year old villages because it is God's will, which overrides international law.

- Nearly everyone thinking that the Balfour promise made by a European country to an international organisation about Palestine could supercede any of the aspirations of Palestine's native inhabitants.

- The founders of Israel thinking that unilaterally declaring statehood on half the land of Palestine against the wishes of its 1.3 million native inhabitants was legal (or for that matter, democratic).

etc... etc... etc...

If none of these classic twisted perceptions of truth ever enter into your judgement of the situation then I have only one more question to ask:  Are you also a US voter/taxpayer? <span id='postcolor'>

My judgment pays no regard to "perceptions of truth" because ultimately, they don't matter. One side claims their actions are resistance to brutal oppression, the other says theirs are self-defense against terrorism. One side says it's the Palestinian's land, the other claims God gave the land to the Jews 2000 years ago. My personal opinions are very biased -- just like yours -- and I'm sure we disagree on most points. However, the bottom line is simple: Suicide attacks = Continuation of violence on both sides.

Semper Fi

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Sep. 03 2002,13:00)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">However, the bottom line is simple: Suicide attacks = Continuation of violence on both sides.<span id='postcolor'>

Well I agree with the statement except it is not the entire bottom line.

You also have to ask something of the other side ie; stop assasinations, bombings, mass arrests, occupation. It seems that so far Israel is not keeping it's word in peace agreements, while Hamas are, they always tell everyone they WILL attack settlers and others until occupation persists.

So the bottom line, boths sides have to agree to something new, and keep their promise.

Then ofcourse 3rd pary has to be there to separate the Jewish and Palestinian extremists. Palestinian extremists = Hamas, Jewish = IDF and decision makers.

[E6Hotel 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Sep. 03 2002,19:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It seems that so far Israel is not keeping it's word in peace agreements, while Hamas are, they always tell everyone they WILL attack settlers and others until occupation persists.<span id='postcolor'>

This is exactly my point. To you, it SEEMS that Israel is not keeping its word. To me, it SEEMS that on many occasions Hamas has stated that their goal is the destruction of Israel and has acted to achieve that goal. If (a big "if" -- oops, personal opinion creeping in) the Palestinian TERRORISTS (not to be confused with noncombatants) only want their own state, they need to put down the C-4, pick up some history books, and start dealing with cold, hard, OBJECTIVE reality. Otherwise, expect no change. Sad but true.

Semper Fi

[bogo 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sam Samson @ Sep. 03 2002,19:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">so, dot. israel should undeclare statehood and just evaporate?

you ARE playing devil's advocate, I hope.

...or is somebody paying you for this?<span id='postcolor'>

Sam tell me one thing. You as a christian you belive that jesus said that Palestine is Israel and it's only for jews.

Could plese show me anywhere in the bible where it may say something like that. Or am i complytly wrong.

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Sep. 03 2002,13:25)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bn880 @ Sep. 03 2002,19:11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It seems that so far Israel is not keeping it's word in peace agreements, while Hamas are, they always tell everyone they WILL attack settlers and others until occupation persists.<span id='postcolor'>

This is exactly my point. To you, it SEEMS that Israel is not keeping its word. To me, it SEEMS that on many occasions Hamas has stated that their goal is the destruction of Israel and has acted to achieve that goal. If (a big "if" -- oops, personal opinion creeping in) the Palestinian TERRORISTS (not to be confused with noncombatants) only want their own state, they need to put down the C-4, pick up some history books, and start dealing with cold, hard, OBJECTIVE reality. Otherwise, expect no change. Sad but true.

Semper Fi<span id='postcolor'>

Does not really SEEM, it is fact that Israel has not kept it's word in the last few weeks.

[Sam Samson 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (bogo @ Sep. 03 2002,19:47)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sam Samson @ Sep. 03 2002,19:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">so, dot. israel should undeclare statehood and just evaporate?

you ARE playing devil's advocate, I hope.

...or is somebody paying you for this?<span id='postcolor'>

Sam tell me one thing. You as a christian you belive that jesus said that Palestine is Israel and it's only for jews.

Could plese show me anywhere in the bible where it may say something like that. Or am i complytly wrong.  <span id='postcolor'>

bogo,

is this some sort of a trick question?

I'm falling for it.

firstly: Jesus was born after the territory had been israel for ca. 1,300 years. He didn't need to say israel is for the jews, just like americans today don't go around saying: this usa is your national home! to one another. that fact needed no affirmation back then.

God promised the territory, back then called canaan, to a man named abraham, then to his son isaac, then to that man's son jacob. that was about 3800 years ago. (genesis, chapter 12, verse 1; verse 7; chapter 13, 14-18)

abraham never took possession of the land. it wasn't time yet. (genesis 14, 16. the chapter also talks about the future captivity in egypt.)

later God spoke to moses by the burning bush. (exodus 3, note verse 17.) (btw: a burning thornbush is a symbol for a nation under divine judgment. this bush was burning in the fire, but it didn't burn up.)

moses led israel, who got exploited as slaves in egypt, out of the fire of slavery and headed towards the promised land. judgment had come to an end.

now. I'm NOT willing to discuss the conquest of canaan by moses, joshua, saul, david and solomon. suffice it to say that they did it by means entirely acceptable in their day.

to understand the national contract God made with israel and its consequences read deuteronomy 28.

if they would keep the law he gave them, they'd be doin' good. they'd even rise to the top among nations.

if they left him, they would go down the drain, even to the point of being cast out of their country. (deuteronomy 28, esp verse 63-66.)

in all this, I can't get into that now, he promised them an ultimate king, a redeemer who would usher in the golden age and make israel the royalty of the world. that man is called the Messiah in the bible.

well. 70 years after the crucifixion israel ceeded to exist as a nation until 1948. I already elaborated on that in an other post.

in my biased view, (I readily admit to that), "jacob's time of trouble" is coming to an end. israel is coming home.

and no terrorist (cartel: the self-styled combatants, not the reasonable ones) will be able to dislodge them from where they are now.

I personally wish that israel would win the present argument by turning the other cheek more forcefully. (I think the same about the other side.)

but I can't forget what foreign minister abba eban said at the UN when israel extended a hand after the '67 war, and got rejected: "I think this is the first war in history that the victors sued for peace, and the vanquished called for unconditional surrender." irrational arabian fanaticism.

methinks, the palos never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.

as long as both sides, especially the palos, don't get into the live-and-let-live-mode, which Jesus incidentally preached, there's no hope for lasting peace.

did that answer your question?

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Sep. 03 2002,19:o0)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">My judgment pays no regard to "perceptions of truth" because ultimately, they don't matter.<span id='postcolor'>

So when you arrive at the scene of an auto accident is it ok to make a judgement based solely on the mood/behaviour of the drivers and simply ignore what any witnesses have to say?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Sep. 03 2002,19:o0)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"> My personal opinions are very biased -- just like yours --<span id='postcolor'>

bi·ased  tr.v.  To be influenced in a particular, typically unfair direction; prejudiced.

What's your bias?

What's mine?

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Sep. 03 2002,19:o0)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...and I'm sure we disagree on most points.<span id='postcolor'>

Why are you so sure?  ...and so what?  It would be boring if we all agreed on everything.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (E6Hotel @ Sep. 03 2002,19:o0)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">However, the bottom line is simple: Suicide attacks = Continuation of violence on both sides.<span id='postcolor'>

The biggest problem with this bottom line is that it gives any and every extremist out there the opportunity to veto the peace process.  Consider this.  The Real IRA's Omagh bombing did not derail the Good Friday Accord in Northern Ireland because the main parties had the courage not to equate such an attack with a continuation of violence.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sam Samson @ Sep. 03 2002,18:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">so, dot. israel should undeclare statehood and just evaporate?<span id='postcolor'>

Of course not.  Reasonable suggestions vary from Israel apologising to paying comprehensive compensation to extending full right of return (which I don't necessarily support).  At the moment however, Israel simply prefers to build more Jewish settlements in the occupied territories.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sam Samson @ Sep. 03 2002,18:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">...or is somebody paying you for this?<span id='postcolor'>

That's exactly the same question some jerk once asked my grandparents when he wanted to know why they were sheltering Jews in their attic and cellar throughout WWII.  By the way, two of my grandmother's brothers got caught doing the same thing.  Only one of them survived Nordhausen concentration camp, but with severe brain damage.

[Duke_of_Ray 0]

Its like Sam and I have the same head!

[bn880 5]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Duke_of_Ray @ Sep. 03 2002,16:56)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Its like Sam and I have the same head! <span id='postcolor'>

Umm, ya right

that would mean you both have half a brain... Look at Sam DOR, at least he has built a fairly complete record of history in his head, you on the other hand are too lazy even for that.