Look at Isreal for a second. The arab population is treated like southern blacks were pre-civil rights. Do we want to bed down with such a country? Any country that does that?
I am not saying that the terroristic response of the Palestinians or even the Isrealis is logical, but the Jewish settlers have no more right to that land than some shlub in New Jersey, who recieves divine confirmation that his homeland is in Isreal. The fact is that the UK f*cked up royally when they split up the Middle East/India-Pakistan colonial areas.
There is plenty of high talking speech on both sides of the Isreal/Palestinian conflict and all of it is bullshit...
Look at Isreal for a second. The arab population is treated like southern blacks were pre-civil rights. Do we want to bed down with such a country? Any country that does that?
I am not saying that the terroristic response of the Palestinians or even the Israelis is logical, but the Jewish settlers have no more right to that land than some shlub in New Jersey, who receives divine confirmation that his homeland is in Isreal. The fact is that the UK f*cked up royally when they split up the Middle East/India-Pakistan colonial areas.
There is plenty of high talking speech on both sides of the Israel/Palestinian conflict and all of it is bullshit...
you make a good point.
but arafat didn't sign the accords, he backed out. if he would have signed them the world (including the u.s.) would be standing on israel's back wondering when they were going to take care of the settlers.
but also keep one thing in mind, there have been settlers (as we've defined them in this context, christian and jewish zealots) in this area since at least the late 19th century. up til the existence of a jewish homeland they'd mostly existed peaceably with the arabian tribes.
israel knows they need to create a palestinian state, otherwise they will be exactly like south africa and india before it. the minority governing the majority.
does every fscking thread that has the word 'political', 'politics' etc end up being flaming about israel and jews etc?
it has something to do with the fact that some (maybe most outside of Isreal?) Jews and most of the world thinks that the Isreal/Paletstine conflict is the pinical of late 20th century stupidity. And all other Jews think that these people are necessarily anti-semetic.
up til the existence of a jewish homeland they'd (the Jews) mostly existed peaceably with the arabian tribes.
No they did not, the Arabian tribes have expelled their neighbouring Jewish tribes from Arabia at the time Islam began. The only place in the Arabian penisnsula where a Jewish community remained was in Yemen (which was always more particlarist since before the time it was called ?Arabia Felix?)
Elsewhere in countries ruled by Islam, non-Muslim communities were more fortunate than non-Chrisitan communities in contemporary Christian-ruled countries (which where the bottom of the barrel in those days), but that didn't make their situation as idyllic as some might believe.
At a certain time under the Califate of Cordoba, Jews and Christians were nearly at the same standing as the Muslims (which was true, but for a shorter time, in Sicily under Norman rule), which was known as the Golden age of al-Andalus, but that was once after the Almoravides got there, and they were just as cruel as the knights of a Godefroy de Bouillon or a later Barbarossa or Richard the Lionheart.
Yet, since the warlike tribes of Western Europe were able to find ways to peaceably live longside each other, I have hope the Jewish and Arab tribes of the Middle-East could do the same in the future.
it has something to do with the fact that some (maybe most outside of Isreal?) Jews and most of the world thinks that the Isreal/Paletstine conflict is the pinical of late 20th century stupidity. And all other Jews think that these people are necessarily anti-semetic.
Hows that for an overgeneralization.
AFAIK people were argueing about religious crap etc irrelevancies in that part of the world (israel & co) already before jesus was born.
There is simply no room for the opinion that both the Israeli Jews and the Palestinian arabs are both being idiots. And why are we talking about Israel/Palestine? Must we always stray from the obvious topic for the sake of one-upmanship?
I guess though that as there is no room for any sort of reasonable opinion on the mid-east so should there lack any reasonable opninio about anti-Americanism. Hey, no one is innocent, so no one has moral authority over another. Sorry, you're not special whoever you are. Of course it's not fair to say that everyone who is anti-American is so because it's fashionable. It's also true in some cases. Feel free to debate what the split is, but you can't deny either.
As Mulattabianca said (via Socrates, or was it Plato?), this is nothing new.
I said treated like, not treated exactly the same.
?Treated like?? means ?treated similarily to??
Not the case here, as shown above.
Quote:
What that means is they are treated as second class citizens in every way shape and form.
Legally speaking, they are citizens of the state, there is no other legal status.
Informal discrimination exists, as in many other countries (including the US), and it has actually been decreasing in the last decades. That discrimination, is fueled by the fact that the concerned ethnic groups are in an armed conflict with each other outised the state, so it impacts on the inter-ethnic relations within the state.
The situation is certainly nothing Israel could boast about, it basically has a Jewish majority among which many deem the Arab minority an alien enemy population, and an Arab minority among which many deem the Jewish majority an alien enemy population.
A resolution of the conflict would do away with most of the discrimination in question, which is still lower than in most countries in the midst of a similar conflict.
Other than that, the Arab-Israeli conflict is one of many secondary conflicts of the second half of the Twentieth century, far behind the intensity (but longer in time) of the nineties' Balkan Wars, the nineties' Sudan internal war, or the eighties' Iran-Iraq war, and so minor in scope when compared to the just slighlty longer conflict between India and Pakistan.
It is only deemed the ?pinnacle? by the concerned parties (surprised?) and some non-concerned observers with a flawed sense of proportions.
It is not a religious conflict, although religion is being used in it.
The thing is that when "views different than mine in a shared discussion" are expressed than no one would bother to label it. When someone says something anti-American or anti-French or what have you then you see their speech labeled as prejudice in response. No one bothers to label what is simply a dissenting opinion if it is devoid of such rhetoric. Well not no one, certainly there are some elements who will overreact and call a club a spade just cause they are idiots like that. You're smart enough to figure out which is which. Unless you are using certain bigoted stereotypes and don't even realize it.
And then we have people like Scott who say "If you disagree with my view of America, your anti-American and deserve the chair."
the islam-vs-jewish/christian problem will be ended on "that day" after the tribulation, by him. but it will get alot worse before it gets better. and israel will be MUCH larger afterwards
to people who like to attack "HIM" do they think about what they will say when they stand in front of "HIM" ? would they say such things to his face?...
the islam-vs-jewish/christian problem will be ended on "that day" after the tribulation, by him. but it will get alot worse before it gets better. and israel will be MUCH larger afterwards
to people who like to attack "HIM" do they think about what they will say when they stand in front of "HIM" ? would they say such things to his face?...
I really have to hand it too JC, the dems are acting so poorly, with what is going on in texas right now... all the democrats left heh. Its a really sad time for bi-partisan politics.. I have to say I'm more right hand than left hand now... if only one politician would come from the center.. you know where i'm coming from.
Comments
Originally posted by Scott
So IMO what the ****? Do whatever we want. Either way "world opinion" is the same.
I didn't say anything to the contrary. I just said that the article was wrong for saying that critiquing America would lead to American isolation.
I am not saying that the terroristic response of the Palestinians or even the Isrealis is logical, but the Jewish settlers have no more right to that land than some shlub in New Jersey, who recieves divine confirmation that his homeland is in Isreal. The fact is that the UK f*cked up royally when they split up the Middle East/India-Pakistan colonial areas.
There is plenty of high talking speech on both sides of the Isreal/Palestinian conflict and all of it is bullshit...
Originally posted by billybobsky
Look at Isreal for a second. The arab population is treated like southern blacks were pre-civil rights. Do we want to bed down with such a country? Any country that does that?
I am not saying that the terroristic response of the Palestinians or even the Israelis is logical, but the Jewish settlers have no more right to that land than some shlub in New Jersey, who receives divine confirmation that his homeland is in Isreal. The fact is that the UK f*cked up royally when they split up the Middle East/India-Pakistan colonial areas.
There is plenty of high talking speech on both sides of the Israel/Palestinian conflict and all of it is bullshit...
you make a good point.
but arafat didn't sign the accords, he backed out. if he would have signed them the world (including the u.s.) would be standing on israel's back wondering when they were going to take care of the settlers.
but also keep one thing in mind, there have been settlers (as we've defined them in this context, christian and jewish zealots) in this area since at least the late 19th century. up til the existence of a jewish homeland they'd mostly existed peaceably with the arabian tribes.
israel knows they need to create a palestinian state, otherwise they will be exactly like south africa and india before it. the minority governing the majority.
Originally posted by billybobsky
Look at Isreal for a second. The arab population is treated like southern blacks were pre-civil rights.
Could US Southern Blacks eat and drink at the same lunch counter as others in 1960?
Could they use the same public facilities as the others?
Could they vote?
Israeli Arab citizens could since 1948.
One should stick to stuff one knows.
Originally posted by Immanuel Goldstein
Could US Southern Blacks eat and drink at the same lunch counter as others in 1960?
Could they use the same public facilities as the others?
Could they vote?
Israeli Arab citizens could since 1948.
One should stick to stuff one knows.
I said treated like, not treated exactly the same.
What that means is they are treated as second class citizens in every way shape and form.
Originally posted by Mulattabianca
does every fscking thread that has the word 'political', 'politics' etc end up being flaming about israel and jews etc?
it has something to do with the fact that some (maybe most outside of Isreal?) Jews and most of the world thinks that the Isreal/Paletstine conflict is the pinical of late 20th century stupidity. And all other Jews think that these people are necessarily anti-semetic.
Hows that for an overgeneralization.
Originally posted by superkarate monkeydeathcar
up til the existence of a jewish homeland they'd (the Jews) mostly existed peaceably with the arabian tribes.
No they did not, the Arabian tribes have expelled their neighbouring Jewish tribes from Arabia at the time Islam began. The only place in the Arabian penisnsula where a Jewish community remained was in Yemen (which was always more particlarist since before the time it was called ?Arabia Felix?)
Elsewhere in countries ruled by Islam, non-Muslim communities were more fortunate than non-Chrisitan communities in contemporary Christian-ruled countries (which where the bottom of the barrel in those days), but that didn't make their situation as idyllic as some might believe.
At a certain time under the Califate of Cordoba, Jews and Christians were nearly at the same standing as the Muslims (which was true, but for a shorter time, in Sicily under Norman rule), which was known as the Golden age of al-Andalus, but that was once after the Almoravides got there, and they were just as cruel as the knights of a Godefroy de Bouillon or a later Barbarossa or Richard the Lionheart.
Yet, since the warlike tribes of Western Europe were able to find ways to peaceably live longside each other, I have hope the Jewish and Arab tribes of the Middle-East could do the same in the future.
Originally posted by billybobsky
it has something to do with the fact that some (maybe most outside of Isreal?) Jews and most of the world thinks that the Isreal/Paletstine conflict is the pinical of late 20th century stupidity. And all other Jews think that these people are necessarily anti-semetic.
Hows that for an overgeneralization.
AFAIK people were argueing about religious crap etc irrelevancies in that part of the world (israel & co) already before jesus was born.
niente di nuovo sotto il sole...
I guess though that as there is no room for any sort of reasonable opinion on the mid-east so should there lack any reasonable opninio about anti-Americanism. Hey, no one is innocent, so no one has moral authority over another. Sorry, you're not special whoever you are. Of course it's not fair to say that everyone who is anti-American is so because it's fashionable. It's also true in some cases. Feel free to debate what the split is, but you can't deny either.
As Mulattabianca said (via Socrates, or was it Plato?), this is nothing new.
Originally posted by billybobsky
I said treated like, not treated exactly the same.
?Treated like?? means ?treated similarily to??
Not the case here, as shown above.
What that means is they are treated as second class citizens in every way shape and form.
Legally speaking, they are citizens of the state, there is no other legal status.
Informal discrimination exists, as in many other countries (including the US), and it has actually been decreasing in the last decades. That discrimination, is fueled by the fact that the concerned ethnic groups are in an armed conflict with each other outised the state, so it impacts on the inter-ethnic relations within the state.
The situation is certainly nothing Israel could boast about, it basically has a Jewish majority among which many deem the Arab minority an alien enemy population, and an Arab minority among which many deem the Jewish majority an alien enemy population.
A resolution of the conflict would do away with most of the discrimination in question, which is still lower than in most countries in the midst of a similar conflict.
Other than that, the Arab-Israeli conflict is one of many secondary conflicts of the second half of the Twentieth century, far behind the intensity (but longer in time) of the nineties' Balkan Wars, the nineties' Sudan internal war, or the eighties' Iran-Iraq war, and so minor in scope when compared to the just slighlty longer conflict between India and Pakistan.
It is only deemed the ?pinnacle? by the concerned parties (surprised?) and some non-concerned observers with a flawed sense of proportions.
It is not a religious conflict, although religion is being used in it.
Originally posted by BuonRotto
...this is nothing new.
It sounds better in Italian.
Originally posted by ColanderOfDeath
The thing is that when "views different than mine in a shared discussion" are expressed than no one would bother to label it. When someone says something anti-American or anti-French or what have you then you see their speech labeled as prejudice in response. No one bothers to label what is simply a dissenting opinion if it is devoid of such rhetoric. Well not no one, certainly there are some elements who will overreact and call a club a spade just cause they are idiots like that. You're smart enough to figure out which is which. Unless you are using certain bigoted stereotypes and don't even realize it.
And then we have people like Scott who say "If you disagree with my view of America, your anti-American and deserve the chair."
Originally posted by Mulattabianca
AFAIK people were argueing about religious crap etc irrelevancies in that part of the world (israel & co) already before jesus was born.
niente di nuovo sotto il sole...
Yeah! Screw Jesus!
That's what you were getting at...right? ..... right? Is this thing on? *tap tap*
Originally posted by BR
Yeah! Screw Jesus!
That's what you were getting at...right? ..... right? Is this thing on? *tap tap*
no. i meant simply that they have been argueing for nothing ... for at LEAST the last 2000 years.
with that on mind, Siddharta seemed so modern.
Originally posted by bunge
It sounds better in Italian.
to people who like to attack "HIM" do they think about what they will say when they stand in front of "HIM" ? would they say such things to his face?...
Originally posted by futuremac
the islam-vs-jewish/christian problem will be ended on "that day" after the tribulation, by him. but it will get alot worse before it gets better. and israel will be MUCH larger afterwards
to people who like to attack "HIM" do they think about what they will say when they stand in front of "HIM" ? would they say such things to his face?...
WOW.... Speechless...
Fellows
Originally posted by FellowshipChurch iBook
WOW.... Speechless...
Fellows
THAT'S A FIRST!!! *rimshot*