terrorism

SLAM: debunk creationism, pseudoscience, and superstitions. Discuss logic and morality.

Moderator: Alyrium Denryle

User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

Actually, the one about a tank opening fire on an unarmed crowd was televised. They literally did open fire on crowds of unarmed people. One guy was shot through the windshield of his car along with his little daughter at point-blank range. The camera crew looked right at the car. The IDF admitted it fired on unarmed people without provocation, but called it an "accident" and promised to investigate. As always.

I would agree with the "blurry moral line" argument if the Israelis were not an occupying military force, but they are. And there are rules for military occupiers under the Geneva Convention: rules which the Israelis completely ignore. So if they want to hold the moral high ground, I suggest they obey the Geneva Convention's provisions on the treatment of people in occupied territories first. When you are the one in a position of advantage, the moral onus falls upon you to clean up your act before demanding that the other guy does.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
EmperorChrostas the Cruel
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 1710
Joined: 2002-07-09 10:23pm
Location: N-space MWG AQ Sol3 USA CA SV

Post by EmperorChrostas the Cruel »

For those of you who think that throwing rocks is not combat, you are woefully ignorant of history. ( Darth Wong)Up until the bow and arrow, throwing rocks and spears WAS high tech combat. You should also note, that few of these engagements are purely stoners VS tankers. The infantrymen in jeeps, and on foot, ARE vulnerable to stones, and regularly take causualtys! (Including fatalities!)

Using ANY potentialy lethal weapon, against armed soldiers, IS engaging in combat, however this definition outrages you sence of morals.


I submit, the TRUE villains in this conflict, are the arab states that will neither give the palestinians a home, or stop financing and egging on the most vulnerable. The arab stoners are teens, used as propaganda cannon fodder. They, (they arab stoners) wear the helm of ignorance, with a +10 youthful sence of immortality. They, (the arab states) seek to destroy Israel, via combat, without giving Israel a stand up fight, or a definable enemy. (which we ALL know how THAT would end!) They wish to use violence, without any risk of responce in kind. Cowards!

As to Israeli soldiers, and gunning down crowds, people are people. There is a spectrum of morals in ANY group, and the hotter things get, the more evil things they get to do under the fog of war. You don't for one minute think that there aren't IDF soldiers that want to kill arabs, fuck the regs? Of course there are. This is the legacy of homicide bombers.

What seems to have been lost in the heat of the moment, is the definition of terrorism, as defined by wemadano is so INTENTIONALY vague, as to include any nation with an army, or a police force, as a terrorist nation. If ALL are terrorists, then NONE are terrorists. All are equally guilty.
DOUBLETHINK.

Again, if blowing up babies in a pizza parlor, or teens in a disco is NOT terrorism, then there is no such thing as terrorism. (Note to the willfully ignorant: Isreal engages in terrosism as well, by my definition, but not as a matter of POLICY! Israeli terrorism is the acts of rogues, or secret acts that the population at large wouldn't sanction if they knew about. ALL of these acts are reviled and condemned, {when the facts see the light of day} by said population, as opposed to passing out candy, and praising, and celebrating.)
MY government, the USA, does things the general population later finds out about and is outraged. Why would ANY government, including the Isrealis be any different? Does this mean, that by and large, that the USA is despicable? Many say yes. I don't. These acts are the exeption, not the rule.
Hmmmmmm.

"It is happening now, It has happened before, It will surely happen again."
Oldest member of SD.net, not most mature.
Brotherhood of the Monkey
User avatar
Martin Blank
Redshirt
Posts: 24
Joined: 2002-07-17 09:08pm
Location: Southern California

Post by Martin Blank »

Hey, Chrostas, I think it's time to let the cleanup crew take that horse away. You can get in trouble for beating even a dead animal too much. :)
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
GoneCrazy
Village Idiot
Posts: 88
Joined: 2002-09-07 11:02am

Post by GoneCrazy »

a terrorist is somebody who inspires terror. since i've never been terrified of anybody (other than my parents occasionally and a few mean people at school) my whole life that means that a "terrorist" is another word for the government wanting to spend more money on the army. Make more departments. Increse the amount of red tape. And generally do everything they can to make people angry at the government. I for one think all the hype at terrorists is a waste and people should be more angry at Bush and anybody in the govt. I also think that holding memorials on Sept. 11 or for Sept. 11 is dumb and a waste of time. Do we hold memorials for D-Day? For the Inquisition? For the wiping out of the Indians by the Spanish? For the starvation of millions of Russian citizens by Stalin? I think not. If you're dead, you're dead wasting time on memorials (where there'll be bunches of stupid prayers, speeches, and pro-Bush stupidity) is a waste. go on living. nuke all the crazies u want to, but make sure that the reason for nuking them isn't because they're Arabic or to complete what you're Dad didn't. I don't think we should go to war with Iraq because both of those reasons are the main reasons for doing it. We should instead go to war with Europe. The total landmas of Eurpoe's bout that of the US, they've disbanded most of their armies, and we could call it payback for the inquisition. :) . U gotta make sure u nuke vatican city though that way we can wipe out the catholics in one easy strike.
Mess with the Best,
Die Like the Rest
GoneCrazy
Village Idiot
Posts: 88
Joined: 2002-09-07 11:02am

Post by GoneCrazy »

sorry for getting offsubject but i had to let go with some of my feelings. keeping them bottled up's unhealthy for u. and i'm out of practice at yelling at the top of my lungs.
Mess with the Best,
Die Like the Rest
User avatar
Martin Blank
Redshirt
Posts: 24
Joined: 2002-07-17 09:08pm
Location: Southern California

Post by Martin Blank »

Actually, yes, there are annual memorials for D-Day in Europe. They're mentioned every June on the news. You seem to miss them.

Europe has not "disbanded" their armies. The UK and France still have nuclear weapons and maintain decent naval fleets. Germany maintains a reasonably strong military, but doesn't often send them beyond German borders, as it makes the rest of Europe nervous when they do. (The history of Germanic aggression goes back centuries.) The United States maintains the bulk of Europe's defenses, and has for decades, but even this is shifting as more of Europe joins NATO. Right now, virtually every nation on the continent is either in or clammoring to get in, changing their military structure and upgrading equipment to be allowed a chance to join, which also keeps their governments in line because of the premise of NATO.

As to your comments on Bush, you should really be reading a bit more. I have no desire to see a unilateral attack on Baghdad, and I do think that the "War on Terrorism" is a poorly-planned, poorly-executed waste of time and money on something that could have been as effetively handled by boosting a few inspections and putting a few more patrols out, but the whole thing about wanting to complete what his father started.... Well, tales of strong disagreement between father and son have been leaking out for weeks; the elder Bush has been advising caution and unity, whereas the younger Bush has a number of hawks in prominent positions on his staff.

You really have no concept of terrorism -- or history, for that matter. Terrorism isn't in someone's mind. I've looked down the barrel of a loaded, cocked gun as someone tried to get their point across to me. He was quite mad at the time, and I didn't know if he was going to pull the trigger, if the last thing my eyes would see was the flash from the gun. THAT is terrorism. Use or threat of force in an illegal manner against an innocent for the sheer purpose of changing someone else's views is terrorism. Simply maintaining and improving a military is not terrorism.

One final note: If you choose not to take part in, view, or listen to the memorials, that's your choice. Many others will choose to take part in memory of friends, family, colleagues, and fellow soldiers, sailors, and airmen whose lives were lost on the battlefields of Antietam, Normandy, Inchon, Khe San, the deserts of Iraq, and a thousand other places you and I have never heard of. They will listen to the words of others and ponder the lives lost for good and for evil, and reflect on it, and perhaps walk away with a will and ability to make a better world, because they are free to do so, just as you are free to keep a closed mind.
You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
User avatar
Zoink
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2170
Joined: 2002-07-04 03:15pm
Location: Fluidic Space

Post by Zoink »

Darth Wong wrote: You honestly don't realize how this makes you sound, do you? A child with a rock in his hands is considered an "armed" combatant in your eyes, and perfectly fair game for a tank crew with a machine gun?
I have no desire to see 11 year-old kids shot dead. I'd like to see the religious fanatisism that makes adults sacrifice their kids as propeganda tools come to an end.

But yes, several thousand years of history agree that kids armed with stones are in fact armed combatants. A slingshot is a deadly weapon. If I went into the my local police department and started cracking heads open, I'd expect to be shot.

If the soldiers feel that their life is in danger, they can fire. U.S. soldiers are permitted to do the same, regardless of any order from a superior to the contrary. The kid knows he is attacking an armed soldier. The kid knows that this soldier will eventually defend himself. I only ask that the kid take responsibility for his own actions or whomever put that kid in the situation (if you feel that kids are not responable for their own actions) do the same.

I am not present at these events, so I can't judge the degree of danger that any one soldier is in when he makes the descision to open fire. I only know that the conflict was initiated by the kid, who chose to attack the soldier with a weapon... therefore I can only lay blame on those responsible for that particular confict.. the kid's parents.

Mr Wong: What is your opinion of the mothers and fathers of these kids? They obviously have a serious beef with the Israeli occupation. So what do they do? They send their 11-year old kid to throw stones at Israeli soldiers armed with M-16s. If I did that here, I'd be labeled a demon. Is this different in Palestine, I certainly don't think so. So am I to lay greater blame on the 18-year old Israeli soldier returning fire, or the parent who encourages their 11-year old kid to attack that 18-year old soldier? I see a situation, caused by a morally wrong parent, encouraging a kid to commit a morally wrong act against a soldier.

-----------

I keep hearing "but the Israeli soldiers are armed with machine guns". I mean, how can a kid really attack a soldier or tank armed with big guns??? Answer: pretty damn easy if the soldiers can't use their weapons. The disparity in firepower is only present if the soldiers are permitted to their weapons.

Scenerio:
I'm sitting at a street corner, and I am attacked by a group of young teenagers. I know that these kids wish to see me injured and will continue to attack until this goal is reached. Possible situations:
1) I am unarmed. Are the kids morally wrong?
2) I am armed, but refuse to use the weapon. Are the kids morally wrong?
3) I am armed, pull out a weapon and shoot one of the kids who is attacking me. Am I wrong? Are the kids still morally wrong?

Note: Simply showing the weapon to scare them is not an option, since that's not an option in Israel. Without the ability to use their weapons, the situation would only elevate until a soldier was killed.

I also fail to see how the morality of any of the above situations change if I am Jewish.


And the shoppers who were machine-gunned for breaking curfew so they could stock up on their depleted food supplies at the local market? They were combatants too? ... so you won't have to admit..
I never made any comment on firing on unarmed shoppers. Don't put words in my mouth in an attempt to demonize me. If these people's only crime is breaking curfew, lethal force is not justified.
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

Zoink wrote:I have no desire to see 11 year-old kids shot dead. I'd like to see the religious fanatisism that makes adults sacrifice their kids as propeganda tools come to an end.
Tell that to the Israeli politicians who insist on putting settlements into Palestinian territory, thus putting their citizens in harm's way and inflaming even more hatred in the local population.
But yes, several thousand years of history agree that kids armed with stones are in fact armed combatants. A slingshot is a deadly weapon. If I went into the my local police department and started cracking heads open, I'd expect to be shot.
In the leg, at most. I doubt they would grab machine guns and hose you down, along with anybody else in your immediate vicinity.
If the soldiers feel that their life is in danger, they can fire.
A soldier should not be in someone else's territory unless a state of war has been declared, in which case aggressive actions (including the deliberate targeting of civilians) becomes normal. Study the history which you claim to understand; deliberate killing of civilians has been practiced by the United States and Israel for a very long time if a state of war has been reached. No one calls it "terrorism".
The kid knows he is attacking an armed soldier. The kid knows that this soldier will eventually defend himself. I only ask that the kid take responsibility for his own actions or whomever put that kid in the situation (if you feel that kids are not responable for their own actions) do the same.
Personal responsibility is a red herring. The point is that the reaction exceeds the threat. Stone-throwing protesters at an economic summit get tear gas, not machine gun fire.
I am not present at these events, so I can't judge the degree of danger that any one soldier is in when he makes the descision to open fire. I only know that the conflict was initiated by the kid, who chose to attack the soldier with a weapon... therefore I can only lay blame on those responsible for that particular confict.. the kid's parents.
And no blame whatsoever on the person who uses vastly excessive force? Good; the next time someone throws a rock at a police station, I look forward to the police hosing down him and anybody else within 20 feet of him with machine gun fire, and you clucking and saying the police bear no responsibility for what happened.
Mr Wong: What is your opinion of the mothers and fathers of these kids? They obviously have a serious beef with the Israeli occupation. So what do they do? They send their 11-year old kid to throw stones at Israeli soldiers armed with M-16s.
So you assume. Did it ever occur to you that the kids hate the Israeli occupation so much that they do this of their own volition, rather than being instructed to by their parents?
Scenerio:
I'm sitting at a street corner, and I am attacked by a group of young teenagers. I know that these kids wish to see me injured and will continue to attack until this goal is reached. Possible situations:
1) I am unarmed. Are the kids morally wrong?
2) I am armed, but refuse to use the weapon. Are the kids morally wrong?
3) I am armed, pull out a weapon and shoot one of the kids who is attacking me. Am I wrong? Are the kids still morally wrong?
If you are part of an unlawful invading force, those kids are perfectly justified in trying to attack you.
Note: Simply showing the weapon to scare them is not an option, since that's not an option in Israel. Without the ability to use their weapons, the situation would only elevate until a soldier was killed.
False dilemma. I see you insist on ignoring non-lethal options such as tear gas. I also notice that you ignore the fact that the prior situation is not morally neutral; one force is an unlawful occupier while the other force is people residing in their own territory.
I also fail to see how the morality of any of the above situations change if I am Jewish.
Don't try to sling baseless accusations of anti-semitism, goddamn it. This has nothing to do with being Jewish and everything to do with being an unlawful occupying force.
I never made any comment on firing on unarmed shoppers. Don't put words in my mouth in an attempt to demonize me. If these people's only crime is breaking curfew, lethal force is not justified.
Then why do you defend the IDF, which has used lethal force against hundreds of unarmed targets, and which treats an attack from any single member of a crowd as an excuse to gun down the entire crowd? If a protester at an economic summit threw a rock, would you think it justified for the police to hose down the whole crowd with machine gun fire?
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Zoink
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2170
Joined: 2002-07-04 03:15pm
Location: Fluidic Space

Post by Zoink »

Tell that to the Israeli politicians who insist on putting settlements into Palestinian territory,
I would not argue with this. Jew and Palistinian should be able to mix anywere in the region w/o violence, but the reality is that this cannot happen. Israel should not continue to build settlements, should dispand those that exist, and isolate the west bank from Israel. Not because Israel has no claim to the territory, but because they should take the moral "high ground" against a group that is incapable of doing so, suck it up, and make this concession in the interest of peace. I just don't see the Palistinians responding in kind.

But I can turn it around:

Tell this to the Islamic fundamentalists whose only goal is the complete and utter destruction of the entire state of Israel. Tell that to those who would attack Israel even w/o settlements, who stated that they will not stop terror attacks even if Isreal completely pulls out. Tell that to the Palestinian politicians who condone attacks against Israel, who refuse to use ANY force against there own people to stop terror attacks.
thus putting their citizens in harm's way and inflaming even more hatred in the local population.
An argument I hate hearing. Especially after hearing so much about the innocent guy standing next to the person with the slingshot or AK-47. I mean, the guy with the stone is "inflaming" and putting himself in harms way as are those standing next to him.

A Palistinian bomb is the understandable result of "imflamming hatred", yet an Israeli missile attack against the bomb facility is an act of terror. An Israeli car driving through a Palistinian town is asking for it, but a Palistinian with an AK-47 is a convincing protestor trying to get noticed.

You want us to see the terrorist acts of the U.S. and Israel... why do you need to justify those of Islamic fundamentalists to do this?

Is your point that: Israel commits terror attacks too (which I agree with) or that Palistine's actions are not terror (which I don't).

A soldier should not be in someone else's territory unless a state of war has been declared
Jihad has been declared against Isreal.

Also, an actual state of war was declared some time ago by neighboring countries and their palestinian supporters, the end result is that Israel now controls Syrian and Egyptian territory.

And no blame whatsoever on the person who uses vastly excessive force? Good; the next time someone throws a rock at a police station, I look forward to the police hosing down him and anybody else within 20 feet of him with machine gun fire, and you clucking and saying the police bear no responsibility for what happened.
How about having everyone within 20 feet doing the same. And instead of throwing at a building, how about having them throw it at the actual police? Shooting him in the leg would be nice, the vast majority of cases in Palestine involve injury and not death. Of course if some case involve actual death, I would not fault the police.

But: Excessive force? Is there's a difference if the soldier took out a slingshot and split the kids head open??? If the soldier is morally allowed to split the kids head open with a slingshot, the fact he uses a gun makes no difference. Vice versa.

Its often suggested that because soldiers have M-16s, this protects them from a flying stone because of vastly superior firepower... but at the same time say soldiers can't use them... meaning they have no protection.... its a catch 22, with the only apparent politically correct thing for the soldier to do is suspend their right to defend themselves.

Then why do you defend the IDF, which has used lethal force against hundreds of unarmed targets, and which treats an attack from any single member of a crowd as an excuse to gun down the entire crowd?
- I defend Israel's right to exist
- I defend Israel's right to station soldiers in Palestine, to police a state that has no desire to police its own people against attacking Israel.
- I defend any soldier's right to use lethal force against a meer stone-throwing opponent(s) if that oponent is close enough to harm/kill them. And to continue to use lethal force until the attack by the opponent(s) has stopped. Similarly, I defend any soldiers right to use lethal force against a gun-wielding oponent(s).
- I agree with the Palistinians, they are at war with Israel.
- I think that in war, innocent casualties are not desired, but sometimes unavoidable.

I will not use a number of criminal incedents to say that Israel has no right to exist, that the IDF should not be in the west bank, that Israel should just "put-up" with terror attacks with no response. I will not fall into Palistinian propeganda that every casualty is an 11 year old innocent kid who was standing next to another kid throwing stones in "peacefull" protest.

Israel is not without fault, as is the U.S. This alone doesn't make the Palistinians right.
deliberate killing of civilians has been practiced by the United States and Israel for a very long time if a state of war has been reached. No one calls it "terrorism".
The deliberate targeting of noncombatants for the purpose of influencing governments is terrorism. If you can find examples of this then yes its terrorism. I never said the U.S. or Israel is above terror.

But I will not agree with the stone throwing kid. You say that maybe the 11-year old kid hates Israel as much as his parents, that his parents aren't to blame. Fine, so the kid made a consious descision to attack a soldier. If he's old enough to understand why he's doing something, if he's old enough to make an informed descision, then we can do away with the entire notion that the situation is any different if it was an 11 year or 42 year old attacking. We can simply look at the morality of the kids attack and the morality of the response of the soldier.
Don't try to sling baseless accusations of anti-semitism, goddamn it. This has nothing to do with being Jewish and everything to do with being an unlawful occupying force.
My comment is true and valid, morality doesn't change just because its Isreal. But you are are right, anti-semitism by pro-Palestinian countries in the U.N. has nothing to do with the situation. We can safely ignore the 300,000 native jews expelled by mid-east countries and forced to live in Israel.

Still, I didn't say YOU felt this way, unlike: <"You obviously want to classify all victims of Israeli terror as "combatants", regardless of whether they are adults or children, armed or unarmed">. I made no comment to that effect.
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

Zoink wrote:Tell this to the Islamic fundamentalists whose only goal is the complete and utter destruction of the entire state of Israel. Tell that to those who would attack Israel even w/o settlements, who stated that they will not stop terror attacks even if Isreal completely pulls out. Tell that to the Palestinian politicians who condone attacks against Israel, who refuse to use ANY force against there own people to stop terror attacks.
Self-fulfilling prophecy. Israel ruthlessly supresses the Palestinians like shit, and the Palestinians hate Israel. Israelis (and their cheering section in America) claim that they have no choice but to ruthlessly suppress the Palestinians because they hate Israelis. Palestinians say they hate Israelis because they are being ruthlessly oppressed. You obviously believe the former is true, and the latter is a lie. I believe the former is a lie, and the latter is true.

Either way, the status quo does not work and will never work. Ultimately, someone has to consider the possibility that Palestinian prosperity is the only thing that would ever make this fanaticism go away; comfortable people generally have too much to lose to be fanatics. To be fair, I would agree if you said that neither side is doing anything to make Palestinian prosperity happen, or even to produce the remote possibility that it would ever happen. But instead, you seem to be taking the position that Israel can do no wrong (and ignoring numerous UN decisions that it has been doing wrong), which is simply unreasonable.
An argument I hate hearing. Especially after hearing so much about the innocent guy standing next to the person with the slingshot or AK-47. I mean, the guy with the stone is "inflaming" and putting himself in harms way as are those standing next to him.
The fact that you hate the argument does not disprove it. You can't gun down a whole crowd because some of them are attacking you, particularly when their weapons are not a serious threat to you (eg- common example of tank crews and rock-throwing kids).
A Palistinian bomb is the understandable result of "imflamming hatred", yet an Israeli missile attack against the bomb facility is an act of terror.
Strawman. I never said that Palestinians are not committing terrorism. I said that Israelis commit terrorism too, and you draw a false distinction between the two.
An Israeli car driving through a Palistinian town is asking for it, but a Palistinian with an AK-47 is a convincing protestor trying to get noticed.
An Israeli invader is asking for it. A Palestinian shooting an invader in his land is exercising his right of self-defense, just as you can exercise your right of self-defense if some person breaks into your living room.
You want us to see the terrorist acts of the U.S. and Israel... why do you need to justify those of Islamic fundamentalists to do this?
Strawman. I only point out that any justification you use to pretend that Israeli terrorism is not terrorism can also be applied to Palestinians. Nowhere have I claimed that terrorism is OK. Do you have a fucking reading problem?
Is your point that: Israel commits terror attacks too (which I agree with) or that Palistine's actions are not terror (which I don't).
No. Your fucking inability to read basic English appalls me.
The deliberate targeting of noncombatants for the purpose of influencing governments is terrorism. If you can find examples of this then yes its terrorism. I never said the U.S. or Israel is above terror.
Concession accepted. You agree, then, that terrorism is used by virtually all governments in time of war. Drawing false moral distinctions between one terrorist act and another is generally the result of knee-jerk cronyism, not honesty.
But I will not agree with the stone throwing kid. You say that maybe the 11-year old kid hates Israel as much as his parents, that his parents aren't to blame. Fine, so the kid made a consious descision to attack a soldier. If he's old enough to understand why he's doing something, if he's old enough to make an informed descision, then we can do away with the entire notion that the situation is any different if it was an 11 year or 42 year old attacking.
Hardly. A 42 year old is much stronger than an 11 year old, and if he's serious about throwing a rock at you, he'll try to get into a position where he can actually hurt you with the damned rock. An 11 year old just throws a rock out of rage and emotion, and can only be thought of as a legitimate military threat to a tank crew if you are either insane or stupid.
My comment is true and valid, morality doesn't change just because its Isreal. But you are are right, anti-semitism by pro-Palestinian countries in the U.N. has nothing to do with the situation. We can safely ignore the 300,000 native jews expelled by mid-east countries and forced to live in Israel.
Stop trying to fan the flames. I have refrained so far from discussing Israeli racism toward Arabs, but you know perfectly well that there's a lot of material there if I choose to go into it, so drop the tangent.
Still, I didn't say YOU felt this way, unlike: <"You obviously want to classify all victims of Israeli terror as "combatants", regardless of whether they are adults or children, armed or unarmed">. I made no comment to that effect.
Oh, suuuure you didn't. You said it's OK to gun down rock-throwing kids and anybody around them, which means that yes, you did say it's OK to classify all victims of Israeli terror as "combatants", even if they are unarmed kids.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Darth Yoshi
Metroid
Posts: 7342
Joined: 2002-07-04 10:00pm
Location: Seattle
Contact:

Post by Darth Yoshi »

Nuking the Vatican? Shouldn't you sack it, taking whatever material goods the Catholics have amassed over the centuries, then nuke it? Not that I agree with you. I'm just saying it'd be a waste to nuke one of the wealthiest organization in the world without taking some of its wealth first.
Image
Fragment of the Lord of Nightmares, release thy heavenly retribution. Blade of cold, black nothingness: become my power, become my body. Together, let us walk the path of destruction and smash even the souls of the Gods! RAGNA BLADE!
Lore Monkey | the Pichu-master™
Secularism—since AD 80
Av: Elika; Prince of Persia
User avatar
Tsyroc
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 13746
Joined: 2002-07-29 08:35am
Location: Tucson, Arizona

Post by Tsyroc »

Darth Yoshi wrote:Nuking the Vatican? Shouldn't you sack it, taking whatever material goods the Catholics have amassed over the centuries, then nuke it? Not that I agree with you. I'm just saying it'd be a waste to nuke one of the wealthiest organization in the world without taking some of its wealth first.
Sounds like a plan. Loot and then nuke. I wouldn't want to lose all the artwork, sculputure, writings....etc. After that nuke away and then repeat. :)
By the pricking of my thumb,
Something wicked this way comes.
Open, locks,
Whoever knocks.
User avatar
Zoink
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2170
Joined: 2002-07-04 03:15pm
Location: Fluidic Space

Post by Zoink »

Darth Wong wrote: you didn't. You said it's OK to gun down rock-throwing kids and anybody around them, which means that yes, you did say it's OK to classify all victims of Israeli terror as "combatants", even if they are unarmed kids.
I'll simply address this point.

STRAWMAN

I said its OK to fire on rock throwing kids. Please show how all victims of Israeli attacks are rock throwing kids or those standing next to them. I never said "All victims are combatants". Please show me how I said curfew-breakers are combatants. "Your fucking inability to read basic English appalls me." [your words not mine]
GoneCrazy
Village Idiot
Posts: 88
Joined: 2002-09-07 11:02am

Post by GoneCrazy »

OHHHH! i forget about sacking it. (stupid me). do u think we should melt the scultpures and crosses and make gold bars out of it or just sell it as is?
they prob'ly do have lots of dough from all those dues (or whatever they call them) they've collected over the years. not to mention loot they've taken from the millions who've died at their hands.
Mess with the Best,
Die Like the Rest
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

Zoink wrote:
Darth Wong wrote: you didn't. You said it's OK to gun down rock-throwing kids and anybody around them, which means that yes, you did say it's OK to classify all victims of Israeli terror as "combatants", even if they are unarmed kids.
I'll simply address this point.

STRAWMAN

I said its OK to fire on rock throwing kids.
Pure sophistry. A rock-throwing kid has neither the arm strength or the range to be a serious threat. His "weapon" is used as an excuse, when anyone with a brain knows that he's not a real combatant and should not be hosed down with machine-gun fire.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
GoneCrazy
Village Idiot
Posts: 88
Joined: 2002-09-07 11:02am

Post by GoneCrazy »

all too true darth wong.
Mess with the Best,
Die Like the Rest
User avatar
EmperorChrostas the Cruel
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 1710
Joined: 2002-07-09 10:23pm
Location: N-space MWG AQ Sol3 USA CA SV

Post by EmperorChrostas the Cruel »

Yet an other distorion. These "kids" are not using the overhand pitch, baseball style of throwing rocks. They are useing SLINGS, a force multiplyer. The comparison is, spears as to arrows, as throwing is to slinging. Once again, "might makes wrong," from broken compass Wong.(I was Johnny Cochran is some other parralel life.)

How many times will you repeat this lie?
Hmmmmmm.

"It is happening now, It has happened before, It will surely happen again."
Oldest member of SD.net, not most mature.
Brotherhood of the Monkey
User avatar
C.S.Strowbridge
Sore Loser
Posts: 905
Joined: 2002-07-03 05:32pm
Location: Burnaby, BC, Canada
Contact:

Post by C.S.Strowbridge »

Darth Wong wrote:Self-fulfilling prophecy. Israel ruthlessly supresses the Palestinians like shit, and the Palestinians hate Israel.
I would just like to point out the Egyptian treated the Palestinians like shit, and the Palestinians hated Israel. The Lebonese treated the Palestinians like shit, and the Palestinians hated Israel. Same for the Jordanians, Kuwatese, Iraqi, etc.

When you add to the fact that before Israel was even a nation the Arabs of the area hated the Jews (killing hundreds in riots in 1921, 1929, 1936-39) you have a hard time proving Israel is to blame.

Or to say it another way, Israeli treatment of Palestinians isn't the cause of Palestinian Terrorism, it's just a excuse.
User avatar
Knife
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 15769
Joined: 2002-08-30 02:40pm
Location: Behind the Zion Curtain

Post by Knife »

First off they are both wrong, Israel and Palestinians both. The situation has lasted so long because of the so called international support both of them get. If we, the world, would quit tring to "contain" the situation and let these poor people have the war they want and need then we could get the conquering and assimulation that has been lacking for decades. Making the war is the easy part, cleaning up after it is hard but if you keep the conflict going in slow motion for decades, its a abomination. Yes, Israel need to evolve it's form of goverment and it's attitudes, but the massivily corrupt goverment of the Palestinians cares little for the people and their needs.
Second, the definition would be the use of lethal force or the threat thereof on non military or combat forces for the express purpose of political coercion by unofficial forces. Freedom fighters fight the system to make their, in their opinion, life better. Terrorists do not or can not fight the system so they attack the people the system represents. If the Palenstinian's would strap bombs to themselves and blow up a ammo dump or other military target I would not call them terrorists. Blowing up a disco club, while good for music's sake, is not fighting for freedom, its a despicable attempt at attention and sould be condemd always.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong

But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
User avatar
Kuja
The Dark Messenger
Posts: 19322
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:05am
Location: AZ

Post by Kuja »

Darth Wong:

If I used a slingshot and a rock to knock out a policeman in NYC, I'd be arrested and shipped off to prison.

In Isreal, the situation is much more drastic. If a crowd of kids kills an Isreali soldier with trown rocks, what are the other soldiers going to do? Stand there? No, they'll open fire in SELF DEFENSE.
Image
JADAFETWA
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22430
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Post by Mr Bean »

In Isreal, the situation is much more drastic. If a crowd of kids kills an Isreali soldier with trown rocks, what are the other soldiers going to do? Stand there? No, they'll open fire in SELF DEFENSE.
Kindly name for me the number of Soldiers in Tanks killed by Rock throwing children


Hell I provide it for you 0!
When two months back a crowd of *youths as its termed where throwing rocks at passing Isrealy tanks, Would you considerit self defense for the tank commander to unbutton the tank grap the mounted Machine Gun and hose the kids, killing two and wounding six?

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Kuja
The Dark Messenger
Posts: 19322
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:05am
Location: AZ

Post by Kuja »

You missed the point.

The point was that they just can't stand there and shoo the kids away. These kids are not gonna stop chucking rocks until the soldiers do SOMETHING, ANYTHING!

No I'm not condoning the use of a tank, if that's what you're thinking.
Image
JADAFETWA
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22430
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Post by Mr Bean »

The point was that they just can't stand there and shoo the kids away. These kids are not gonna stop chucking rocks until the soldiers do SOMETHING, ANYTHING!
*Rubber Bullets, *Tear Gas, All Soliders in Isreal Carry both of those along with thier regular guns, All it takes it changing a clip or pulling a pin

And how about Warning shots? Nope they don't use them

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
User avatar
Kuja
The Dark Messenger
Posts: 19322
Joined: 2002-07-11 12:05am
Location: AZ

Post by Kuja »

That's cause warning shot only ENCOURAGE the kids! They get the impression that the Isrealis won't firs back at them! That's how f'd up that whole place is!
Image
JADAFETWA
User avatar
Mr Bean
Lord of Irony
Posts: 22430
Joined: 2002-07-04 08:36am

Post by Mr Bean »

That's cause warning shot only ENCOURAGE the kids! They get the impression that the Isrealis won't firs back at them! That's how f'd up that whole place is!
Rubber bullets and tear-gas then, at range they still break bones, better than rocks do to, they are reqiured to carry them, think it was not an accident they never *thought of using em? :roll:

"A cult is a religion with no political power." -Tom Wolfe
Pardon me for sounding like a dick, but I'm playing the tiniest violin in the world right now-Dalton
Post Reply