Mr. President, Don’t Forget The Nakba

[pelsar]

486. promoting dictatorship is immoral....

Last edited Sat Jan 18, 2014, 03:26 AM - Edit history (11)

thats why i have the gall to question your morals....and you have no qualms about creating a new dictatorship

First you acted like you were all about human rights and better lives for the Palestinians by arguing that they should have a democracy over a dictatorship, then the truth comes out that you want them to have a democracy only as way for Israel

i said it twice, my concern is not so much for the Palestinians in having a democracy....its about living in peace with stability. They have a democracy we all stand a better chance of living in peace and stability. As far as the settlements go and the border, i don't really give a shit, democracies have a better chances of putting land ownership and other religions as secondary to secular state issues.

I believe its you who are using "human rights" as a moral stance (while you promote a dictatorship?)
_________________


land ownership religion, its about living a decent life.'
are you claiming that one can't have a decent life if one is not living on the very same land that ones genetic parents lived on?

Otherwise society would have chaos. Imagine if someone in your street chased you out of your home and argued that since you are now forced to live in a different street, that you have no right to reclaim your childhood home that was taken over by force because it is not about 'land ownership religion, its about living a decent life.


do you know ANYTHING about HISTORY? Anything at all.

I was once told and now i see it clearly with you, that ideologies require that history be ignored, long term, short term its pretty much irrelevant to you isn't it? (You also probably don't like cultural anthropology as it defines how different cultures react to different situations)

People have be chased out of their homes since the first tribes got organized and when those that were chased out or moved, for whatever the reason, made new decent lives in their new lands. (Whereas states always had a thing for land and its resources, as far as decent living on the individual basis, its never been a factor.

you do know about post WWII and the ethnic cleansing that went on post WWII, the resettlement of the refugees, their new lives correct? that was the decade of 1940's the very same decade that Israel was established. And millions of people all over the word made new decent lives on land that was NOT their fathers or grandfathers. Now that short history lesson is finished, do you still want to claim that one cannot have a decent life if they are not on their grandfathers/ fathers land?

and your claiming that all of those millions of post WWII refugees (and from other wars) have lived miserable lives (not decent).....that is your claim, or do you want to "modify and retract again.? (because its so easy to refute....)

______

3) Please show me the sentence where I said that 'Israel would attack Egypt'. Just include the link where I said those specific words.

Egypt has tightly controlled that border so as not to trigger another Israeli assault or incursion, etc.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=55958
perhaps you meant just attacking gaza (others here have claimed israel will attack egypt)
___________________________________________________
To prove this I have a simple question:
If Egypt suddenly decides to completely and permanently open that border and supplies of food and arms are streaming into Gaza, then Israel would have no ability to tighten pressure on Gaza whenever Israel is attacked, and Gaza would be able to keep bringing in more and more rockets to fight back with.

Do you think Israel would not have a problem with losing the ability to restrict Gaza from acquiring sophisticated weapons which could be brought in by a completely open border with Egypt?

do you still want to go with "tightly controlled" or does that too need a "modification and retraction (another one)?

what are you proving? The tunnels were open and arms and building supplies were brought in and everyone knew about it. How else did the rockets go from kassams to military grade Grads, how else did the modern shopping mall get built along with the 5 star hotel? The tunnelers were interviewed by israeli TV by Time magazine. Israel already had no ability to influence egypt, that was obvious to all. Why the Egyptians chose to let the importers do it via tunnel as opposed to above ground is politics.

Your either claiming israel has influence or it doesn't, make up your mind. and of course:
WHAT would Israel do if Egypt did something the Israel didn't like?....(if your claiming that israel has influence)

btw....you may not get this, but the more sophisticated the weapons the Palestinians have the more lives they will lose......as they up their arsenal as they have been doing, they just up the violence....
_______

tsk tsk tsk..

1) As a moral issue, I completely disagree with anyone targeting and killing innocent civilians, period. As a practical issue, there are grey areas, because sometimes people at war don't have the ability or precision to prevent innocents from being killed.

I asked you a few things, this time try to answer:
you mentioned that the rockets where their only choice, i asked you to do some research and you'll find that its not true....i assume you would rather not face the fact that you are wrong again. So shall i tell u and let you once again retract your "mistake" or shall u do the research?

I cannot see any other way for Palestinians to fight back until they are able to get the same kind of weapons that Israel has.
is there a 'gray" area, when a Palestinian goes to a high school and guns down the students? is that your definition of gray area. How about when the kassams from gaza are launched at the same hour consistenly when school is let out (when parents are picking up their kids). I'm just trying to define this "gray" area of yours. Are those "gray areas? and they have no choice but to try to kill as many kids as possible?


AND the other side has extremely advanced and powerful bombs that they can guide straight to a specific target and still result in civilian deaths.

these precision munitions...when they explode are the explosions controlled, does the shrapnel know who to hit and who not to hit?
and these precision munitions that israel has, are they 100% precise, never missing?

so i understand that israel is intentionally killing civilians? the pilots wait until enough civilians are near the target and then they shoot?

btw, you never did answered: hizballa shot some rockets at the christian/arab/jewish town and killed some arab-israelis and apologized. What do you think? should they have apologized or not?
___________________________________________


so a free press is also of secondary importance to you?
A free press means nothing in a democracy when the press tows the company line and accepts the unjust actions of its government under the banner of being 'patriotic'.

just for basic information: you do know that obama was elected and much of that was because of the press, its exposes on the war etc...But we are getting a good feel for your priorities:
1) its not free speech and a free press
2) its not civil rights

but it is ethnically based land ownership....under a dictatorship if need be, and then they can have a decent life
_________________________________________

The settlements are not being built on 'state land', they are being built on land that is taken from the Palestinians.
it is state land as its not private owned.
_____________