The Cellar  

Go Back   The Cellar > Main > Current Events
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Current Events Help understand the world by talking about things happening in it

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-25-2006, 09:10 AM   #1
MaggieL
in the Hour of Scampering
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jeffersonville PA (15 mi NW of Philadelphia)
Posts: 4,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippikos
I never said "a few consessions".
Oh...so then it's actually "many concessions"?

What are they? What is that end state?

Is it possible you don't really beleive in it either?
__________________
"Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."

MaggieL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2006, 09:51 AM   #2
Hippikos
Flocci Non Facio
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In The Line Of Fire
Posts: 571
Quote:
Is it possible you don't really beleive in it either?
Reverting to straw man tactics yourself now, Maggie?

I believe peace is possible, as much as it was possible in N-Irleand. Basically it all reverts to 1967.
__________________
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.
Hippikos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2006, 10:10 AM   #3
MaggieL
in the Hour of Scampering
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jeffersonville PA (15 mi NW of Philadelphia)
Posts: 4,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippikos
Basically it all reverts to 1967.
So...1967 wasn't OK in 1967, but it's OK now?

It was a causus belli then.
__________________
"Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."


Last edited by MaggieL; 08-25-2006 at 10:13 AM.
MaggieL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 05:50 AM   #4
MaggieL
in the Hour of Scampering
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jeffersonville PA (15 mi NW of Philadelphia)
Posts: 4,060
I think Hippikos gets his internet access at work. I wonder if he's paid for his propagandizing online? If so, I hope he's not paid for answering my last question, because he didn't.
__________________
"Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."

MaggieL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 07:06 AM   #5
Hippikos
Flocci Non Facio
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In The Line Of Fire
Posts: 571
ah...Maggie... mother of innuendo. As usual your response only adresses the messenger and not the message.

I have internet access both at work and at home and wished I got paid for my writings. Maybe you can make me an offer I can't refuse?

As for your question; pls try to read my messages instead of only looking at it, your answer was responded to.

Have a nice day!
__________________
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.
Hippikos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 08:00 AM   #6
MaggieL
in the Hour of Scampering
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jeffersonville PA (15 mi NW of Philadelphia)
Posts: 4,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippikos
As for your question; pls try to read my messages instead of only looking at it, your answer was responded to.
Perhaps you can point out where. Assuming you're reading rather than only looking at it.
__________________
"Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."

MaggieL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 08:08 AM   #7
Hippikos
Flocci Non Facio
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In The Line Of Fire
Posts: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaggieL
Perhaps you can point out where. Assuming you're reading rather than only looking at it.
Are we looking at the same thread, Maggie?

Quote:
I believe peace is possible, as much as it was possible in N-Irleand. Basically it all reverts to 1967.
__________________
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.
Hippikos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 08:56 AM   #8
MaggieL
in the Hour of Scampering
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jeffersonville PA (15 mi NW of Philadelphia)
Posts: 4,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippikos
Are we looking at the same thread, Maggie?
Maybe not. The one I'm talking about includes:

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaggieL
So...1967 wasn't OK in 1967, but it's OK now?

It was a causus belli then.
But then if you're "just looking at it" you might have missed it.
__________________
"Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."

MaggieL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 07:34 AM   #9
Hippikos
Flocci Non Facio
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In The Line Of Fire
Posts: 571
Quote:
Where "unilaterally" means "for defensive purposes, took the land via which they were attacked in a war, without asking the attackers their preference."
Defensive...really...

"I do not think Nasser wanted war. The two divisions he sent to The Sinai would not have been sufficient to launch an offensive war. He knew it and we knew it." Yitzhak Rabin, Israel's Chief of Staff in 1967, in Le Monde, 2/28/68

"Moshe Dayan, the celebrated commander who, as Defense Minister in 1967, gave the order to conquer the Golan...[said] many of the firefights with the Syrians were deliberately provoked by Israel, and the kibbutz residents who pressed the Government to take the Golan Heights did so less for security than for the farmland...[Dayan stated] 'They didn't even try to hide their greed for the land...We would send a tractor to plow some area where it wasn't possible to do anything, in the demilitarized area, and knew in advance that the Syrians would start to shoot. If they didn't shoot, we would tell the tractor to advance further, until in the end the Syrians would get annoyed and shoot.

And then we would use artillery and later the air force also, and that's how it was...The Syrians, on the fourth day of the war, were not a threat to us.'" The New York Times, May 11, 1997.

Israel has a legacy of provocations in order to excuse their expensionism. In Israeli Prime Minister Moshe Sharatt's personal diaries, there is an excerpt from May of 1955 in which he quotes Moshe Dayan as follows: "[Israel] must see the sword as the main, if not the only, instrument with which to keep its morale high and to retain its moral tension. Toward this end it may, no - it must - invent dangers, and to do this it must adopt the method of provocation-and-revenge...And above all - let us hope for a new war with the Arab countries, so that we may finally get rid of our troubles and acquire our space." Quoted in Livia Rokach, "Israel's Sacred Terrorism."

And not to forget the bombing of US Liberty in order to provocate US into war with Egypt.

Quote:
"...and that's why international terrorism is justified."
That's no answer, that's an evasion.
__________________
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.
Hippikos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 08:13 AM   #10
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
Yes, the only way you can paint the 67 war as offensive is to cherry-pick quotes here and there.
Quote:
That's no answer, that's an evasion.
Evasion answer to an evasion question.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 10:08 AM   #11
Hippikos
Flocci Non Facio
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In The Line Of Fire
Posts: 571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Undertoad
Yes, the only way you can paint the 67 war as offensive is to cherry-pick quotes here and there.
Now it's cherry picking quotes suddenly? Does that mean they didn't say it or doesn't these quotes fit your world view?

Quote:
Evasion answer to an evasion question.
It was a direct question and you're still evasing it.

MaggieL; again, it all goes back to the 1967 borders. It has been stated by all parties concerned that these borders are acceptable to all. Which means peace in the area. But, I have to repeat myself in your case; that means concessions from Israel and we know that they don't negotiate, they impose actions unilaterally.

Their "unilateral" withdrawal from Gaza (in which they're back again) was a well calculated strategy to increase their territory on the West Bank. 7000 settlers at the end were impossible to protect without collossal efforts and costs. Just a matter of cost and balances.
__________________
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.
Hippikos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 10:35 AM   #12
MaggieL
in the Hour of Scampering
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Jeffersonville PA (15 mi NW of Philadelphia)
Posts: 4,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hippikos
MaggieL; again, it all goes back to the 1967 borders. It has been stated by all parties concerned that these borders are acceptable to all.
And that would be the end of the salami game? It was reason enough for war in 1967, but now it's suddenly OK. You'll have pardon me if I'm skeptical.

I'm also envisioning a slot machine as designed by an anti-Israelite (there's too much shell game to use a more precise label than that).

You put a coin in and launch an attack...I mean...you pull the lever. If you win something, you get to keep it. If you don't, the UN imposes a cease-fire, you get your coin back and try again in five years.
__________________
"Neither can his Mind be thought to be in Tune,whose words do jarre; nor his reason In frame, whose sentence is preposterous..."

MaggieL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-2006, 04:23 AM   #13
Hippikos
Flocci Non Facio
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: In The Line Of Fire
Posts: 571
Quote:
If my home was confiscated, I'd be really, really steaming mad.
Well, there ya go UT, starting to feel what Palestines felt.

Quote:
I'd start by bringing my grievances to the governments involved, the local government and the federal government. I'd both question the legitimacy of the UN and demand to speak to the UN to try to reverse the situation. I would use every bit of power I could find. Up to, and not including, taking up arms to kill people.
Well there ya go again UT. Numerous UN motions have been accepted on that issue which Israel has not implicated.

Quote:
I'd ask Jacquelita if I could move in with her. If her house was confiscated, I'd suggest that we move to our mom's houses, if our moms were agreeable. If that didn't fly, I'd call my friends in California and ask if we could hang for a while until we got jobs.

After a while, the reality of moving on with my life would overwhelm the anger at being uprooted. I would get a job, get productive. I'd watch comedies. I would still work to affect the politics that led to the situation, which is to say I would try to end the UN, and ask for some level of reparations from the new owner. I would still try to use every bit of power I could find. Up to, and not including, taking up arms to kill people.

After a number of years, I would simply try to make the most of my life, because it makes no sense to harbor such anger. If I had children, I would tell them that those people took our house, which made life tough for a while; but I would also tell them that a lingering, resentful anger is unproductive. I'd tell them that it is far more important to bring about a culture of respect for property and people. And that to bring about such a culture is the ultimate revenge and the sensible response to what has happened.

In teaching my children, I would point to the highest moral examples, such as Gandhi, and if I were Christian I'd use the example of Jesus, to show how sometimes there is a greater value in turning the other cheek to our adversaries.
Thank you for an insight in your life philosophy. I believe your forgot to mention how you would react on the fact that the intruders, whilst robbing your place have murdered some of your relatives, respectively have separated you from them. I even accept that you would turn your other cheek in that case and move on with your life by watching comedies whilst living with your mother.

Quote:
Now, the question right back at you. I've answered, so you please answer. What would YOU do if your home was confiscated?
Most likely I would do what certainly most Americans would do (helped by their right to bear arms) and would blast the hell outta them if they had the guts to steal my house and start killing my relatives. I’m pretty sure the majority of all people would react that way.

Quote:
Would you kill their grandchildren?
Absolutely not. But I can’t say what my grandchildren would do if they were in the same situation as I was, probably the same.

Quote:
"...and that's why international terrorism is justified." Now you see how I came to that reply.
This was my answer in post #86, probably you overlooked it. “NO terrorism is justified, from nobody, inc Israel. Some say one's freedom fighter ist the other's terrorist. Most of Israel's PM's started their carreer as terrorist.”
__________________
Believe those who are seeking the truth. Doubt those who find it.
Hippikos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 10:38 AM   #14
Undertoad
Radical Centrist
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Cottage of Prussia
Posts: 31,423
You know what? I'm not really evading that question at all. To show you what I mean, I'll answer it.

WHAT WOULD I DO IF MY HOME WAS CONFISCATED.

If my home was confiscated, I'd be really, really steaming mad.

I'd start by bringing my grievances to the governments involved, the local government and the federal government. I'd both question the legitimacy of the UN and demand to speak to the UN to try to reverse the situation. I would use every bit of power I could find. Up to, and not including, taking up arms to kill people.

I'd ask Jacquelita if I could move in with her. If her house was confiscated, I'd suggest that we move to our mom's houses, if our moms were agreeable. If that didn't fly, I'd call my friends in California and ask if we could hang for a while until we got jobs.

After a while, the reality of moving on with my life would overwhelm the anger at being uprooted. I would get a job, get productive. I'd watch comedies. I would still work to affect the politics that led to the situation, which is to say I would try to end the UN, and ask for some level of reparations from the new owner. I would still try to use every bit of power I could find. Up to, and not including, taking up arms to kill people.

After a number of years, I would simply try to make the most of my life, because it makes no sense to harbor such anger. If I had children, I would tell them that those people took our house, which made life tough for a while; but I would also tell them that a lingering, resentful anger is unproductive. I'd tell them that it is far more important to bring about a culture of respect for property and people. And that to bring about such a culture is the ultimate revenge and the sensible response to what has happened.

In teaching my children, I would point to the highest moral examples, such as Gandhi, and if I were Christian I'd use the example of Jesus, to show how sometimes there is a greater value in turning the other cheek to our adversaries.

Now, the question right back at you. I've answered, so you please answer. What would YOU do if your home was confiscated?

Would you kill the confiscators?

Would you kill their grandchildren?

"...and that's why international terrorism is justified." Now you see how I came to that reply.
Undertoad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-28-2006, 11:11 AM   #15
rkzenrage
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
When they start putting my children in camps, keeping me from jobs to feed them, keeping us from having equal medical supplies for them, then killing them in retaliation for something someone else did... yup, after a while... I may want to kill em' all. I may want them to feel just like I do in hopes that they would stop. If they know what it feels like they may stop. It would be my only weapon.
I hope that it would not be my reaction, but if it was all I know... yes, it probably would be & a rational one.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:58 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.