The avowed, often stated goal of the radical element of Islam is to exterminate Israel. They tried accomplish this a number of times by militarily attacking Israel. The last time was in 1967.
In 1967 Israel was attacked by Arab nations led by secular, pan-Arab nationalists. Islamism is actually this older ideology dressed up in religious clothing and fanaticism, but we can say quite surely that the soldiers of 1967 did not have today's fanatic zeal. This is why Israel could reason with those enemy nations and strike peace deals with them.
There are those in Israel's government today that still think they can make concessions of appeasement. History tells us that that leads to disaster.
I never said anything about concessions, just that occupation without the application of civil law is at least somewhat immoral. Right now it appears to be a lesser evil. If you'd like to learn what I'd do if I were in charge of Israel (which I regrettably am not yet), please feel free to email me and we can speak in private. My ideas are things that I don't necessarily want archived forever by Slashdot.
To exterminate Israel is still the ultimate goal of the Palestinians and their mentors Iran, with the entire muslim world joining the fray or at least cheerleading, with UN approval of course. Another full scale war with Israel is not an "if" but "when".
Such a war is an "if, but quite possibly". Israel is besieged and surrounded by fanatics and tyrants, but it does have nuclear weapons.
I am sure you have heard of the term "Armageddon" in reference to doomsday and the end of the world. It actually refers to a large valley just north of Jerusalem, where according to Biblical prophecy the last battle of humanity's ultimate war will be fought, where ALL nations are predicted to participate in. Even today, the only nation on Israel's side is the USA. When, not if, that changes, look for Israel's enemies to once again try unsuccessfully to "solve" the dilemma of Israel and especially Jerusalem by military means.
First of all, I already knew that bit of mythology. Secondly, what do you mean "once again"? Israel's enemies have never quite stopped trying to destroy her.
No please quit agreeing with me see angrily. I know that pro-Palestinian internet posters can get histrionic, anti-Semitic, and quite annoyingly tinfoil-hatted, but you and I are on the same side of this debate. We simply disagree on the means to our common end.
Unfortunately, at least in my opinion you've been taken in by a well-known Palestinian propaganda machine. We call it "Pallywood", and it's not your fault for being deceived: the Muslim world spends a lot of money on propaganda campaigns in Europe (which has an increasing Muslim population...) and the European media (due to the more leftist orientation of European societies in general) are only too happy to tell a story of brave resistance fighters against an evil occupation. They are especially happy to tell that story if the villains are Jewish; I know that anti-Semitism has decreased by an incredible amount since World War 2 but it has by no means disappeared. Google the term Pallywood to learn that:
A) Many of the so-called tragedies you may have heard about are complete fabrications. B) When a real tragedy does happen, it is recorded and all audio, video, and picture documentation is reused later on to fabricate additional tragedies. C) Those things that do happen to Palestinians aren't always even caused by Israel. One video of a so-called Israeli massacre turned out to actually be of the aftermath of a Hamas weapon (a mortar, IIRC) misfiring into a Gazan market. The casualties and the suffering were quite real, but they simply had nothing to do with Israel -- unless of course you are Palestinian, in which case every death is Israel's fault by default.
I'm half Danish and I live in Denmark. The Danes tend to be rather proud of the resistance movement that they had during the nazi occupation in the 1940's -- and I can totally understand why. Even though killing people is generally not a nice thing, I certainly cannot say that it was wrong of them to resist the nazi occupation, including by killing Germans. Likewise, I cannot say that it is wrong of the Palestinians to resist the zionist occupation, including by killing Israelis. What Israel is doing to the Palestinians amounts to an ethnical cleansing strikingly similar to what happened in Europe in the second world war.
I simply can't understand a charge of ethnic cleansing when the Palestinians have been neither moved nor killed in any numbers sufficient to put a dent in their demographic trends.
I assume that you don't agree, but then how do you explain all the reports about Israeli soldiers shooting children up close in cold blood? Or herding large number of civilians into a building and then bombing it? What about the graffiti the soldiers had written in Gaza with statements like "Death to all arabs"? I can look up the links for you if you want me to.
Please post links, as the only one of those stories I've ever seen remotely substantiated is the graffiti. Oh, and the one about the use of phosphorous shells; that's just fucking wrong and if there was a responsible, reliable venue to which to extradite the bastards responsible I'd say go for it -- I only regret that extraditing IDF officials for using phosphorous would probably just lead to fallacious charges in a kangaroo court of "genocide" or something like that.
At first glance it might seem odd that a people who only 65 years ago were victims of such horrible acts would turn around and do the same thing to others, but it's really not that strange; it's a common pattern -- just think of how people who were abused as children tend to be the ones who themselves abuse children later in their lifes! It really comes down to not being able to forgive the terrible things that have been done to you, and therefore hanging on to the suffering, and then, unintentionally, ending up perpetuating the same kind of actions. I have observed that kind of pattern in my own life, where I have treated people who were close to me badly, and later thought "Why in the world did I act like that", and then realized that I had been similarly treated badly earlier in my life and had not fully recovered from it, and that was what was causing my behavior. What we're seeing in Israel's behaviour is
AFAIK, Israel invaded Palestine becuase Palestine was about to invade Israel. Pre-emptive invasion of a hostile neighbor, is not the same as invasion of a peacful neighbor that won't do what you want (The reason we went to war with Iraq the first time, to liberate Kuwait).
I know that, but I just think that it's more moral to withdraw and prepare a harsh retaliation for the inevitable invasion attempt than to continue an occupation that leaves the Arabs with no chance whatsoever to change their ways and make peace. It's like in "Evolution of the Daleks": the Doctor had to offer them peaceful lives on a planet somewhere, or it wouldn't be OK to fight them when they reject the offer. One must offer peace, even if one knows it will be rejected, in order to justify war.
USA Today is an infotainment rag that just tells people what they want to hear. The New York Times is a reputable newspaper that tends to report the truth, except for a few lies by omission and the Iraq War stuff (for some reason 2/3s of the damn country got caught up by that). Fox News is flagrant propaganda. Al-Jazeera is somewhere in between the New York Times and Fox News.
In reality, defendant's arguments in cases like these are, historically, as valid as the victorious parties in the preceding conflict allow them to be. That, and how useful the defendant happens to be to the victors. Just ask von Braun and friends.
There's the issue. IMHO, the question is not "were you following orders" but "would the order be carried out even if you disobeyed". I can't see where it's immoral for even a Nazi soldier to carry out an immoral order if they know that disobedience will only result in needless loss to themselves rather than saving human life or any other good.
I agree.. Though BSG is my favorite show, it does have some flaws. Sometimes it's ok, even necessary, to make a judgment even if it puts you on the wrong side of history. War is not always evil. Killing is not always evil. In fact, someone could argue that non-violence and respect for feelings is weakness.
Do you really mean those things, or are you a neoconservative;-)?
The problem is that BSG never has anyone grow a backbone and tackle a moral problem. In real life, some people do and some people don't. Only in fiction is it all or nothing.
I'm fairly sure that dilemma refers to the large-scale perception that Israel is occupying "Palestine". Which has a kernel of truth, as Israel indeed militarily occupies the West Bank, and this is quite immoral.
Of course, as my sig says, the Islamists deserve to lose because they place killing Jews over preserving the lives of their own people and building a civilization of their own. To use a sci-fi analogy, their behavior is that of Daleks.
Well then they could try not firing rockets into our country. Perhaps next time they want to perpetrate 8 years of rocket attacks and a terrorist intifada they'll think on that.
Yeah, and for some reason he named Jesus as "Yeshuah", which is Hebrew. This makes no sense whatsoever, as us Jews really don't consider that Jesus guy to have been a particularly godly man and get no sense of inclusion from having him named in our holy language.
But major props to the man for the obvious shout-out to Islam and Muslims.
Well maybe someone would care if the entire Constitutional Amendment procedure weren't built to discourage Constitutional amendments for all but the highest and broadest purposes.
The problem with that little test is that it would call me a Replicant. I'm not a Replicant; I just have a sense of flippant calm about me and don't care much for anonymous small animals.
Look, I agree with you, but you're using the wrong terms. I definitely agree that anyone can improve their health through common-sense exercise and reach a level of healthful fitness. What I disagree on is that everyone has an equally easy time reaching the level of athletic fitness commonly known as "buff". So it may turn out that while geeks can easily get fit enough to run a couple of miles without trouble (I know I am...), many geeks could have some genetic or hormonal factor that increases intelligence while decreasing the ability to get college-football-player, beat-people-up, impress-women buff.
This even makes evolutionary sense. A primitive hunter who was particularly clever could use strategy to catch and kill prey, and this would obviate the need to get as really big and strong as the dumber hunters who could only obtain meat by brute force. Evolution would therefore compromise the one trait against the other in many individuals since no circumstance ever caused the survival-selection of only individuals who were strong and smart.
Slashdot Mirror
The avowed, often stated goal of the radical element of Islam is to exterminate Israel. They tried accomplish this a number of times by militarily attacking Israel. The last time was in 1967.
In 1967 Israel was attacked by Arab nations led by secular, pan-Arab nationalists. Islamism is actually this older ideology dressed up in religious clothing and fanaticism, but we can say quite surely that the soldiers of 1967 did not have today's fanatic zeal. This is why Israel could reason with those enemy nations and strike peace deals with them.
There are those in Israel's government today that still think they can make concessions of appeasement. History tells us that that leads to disaster.
I never said anything about concessions, just that occupation without the application of civil law is at least somewhat immoral. Right now it appears to be a lesser evil. If you'd like to learn what I'd do if I were in charge of Israel (which I regrettably am not yet), please feel free to email me and we can speak in private. My ideas are things that I don't necessarily want archived forever by Slashdot.
To exterminate Israel is still the ultimate goal of the Palestinians and their mentors Iran, with the entire muslim world joining the fray or at least cheerleading, with UN approval of course. Another full scale war with Israel is not an "if" but "when".
Such a war is an "if, but quite possibly". Israel is besieged and surrounded by fanatics and tyrants, but it does have nuclear weapons.
I am sure you have heard of the term "Armageddon" in reference to doomsday and the end of the world. It actually refers to a large valley just north of Jerusalem, where according to Biblical prophecy the last battle of humanity's ultimate war will be fought, where ALL nations are predicted to participate in. Even today, the only nation on Israel's side is the USA. When, not if, that changes, look for Israel's enemies to once again try unsuccessfully to "solve" the dilemma of Israel and especially Jerusalem by military means.
First of all, I already knew that bit of mythology. Secondly, what do you mean "once again"? Israel's enemies have never quite stopped trying to destroy her.
No please quit agreeing with me see angrily. I know that pro-Palestinian internet posters can get histrionic, anti-Semitic, and quite annoyingly tinfoil-hatted, but you and I are on the same side of this debate. We simply disagree on the means to our common end.
Unfortunately, at least in my opinion you've been taken in by a well-known Palestinian propaganda machine. We call it "Pallywood", and it's not your fault for being deceived: the Muslim world spends a lot of money on propaganda campaigns in Europe (which has an increasing Muslim population...) and the European media (due to the more leftist orientation of European societies in general) are only too happy to tell a story of brave resistance fighters against an evil occupation. They are especially happy to tell that story if the villains are Jewish; I know that anti-Semitism has decreased by an incredible amount since World War 2 but it has by no means disappeared. Google the term Pallywood to learn that:
A) Many of the so-called tragedies you may have heard about are complete fabrications.
B) When a real tragedy does happen, it is recorded and all audio, video, and picture documentation is reused later on to fabricate additional tragedies.
C) Those things that do happen to Palestinians aren't always even caused by Israel. One video of a so-called Israeli massacre turned out to actually be of the aftermath of a Hamas weapon (a mortar, IIRC) misfiring into a Gazan market. The casualties and the suffering were quite real, but they simply had nothing to do with Israel -- unless of course you are Palestinian, in which case every death is Israel's fault by default.
I'm half Danish and I live in Denmark. The Danes tend to be rather proud of the resistance movement that they had during the nazi occupation in the 1940's -- and I can totally understand why. Even though killing people is generally not a nice thing, I certainly cannot say that it was wrong of them to resist the nazi occupation, including by killing Germans. Likewise, I cannot say that it is wrong of the Palestinians to resist the zionist occupation, including by killing Israelis. What Israel is doing to the Palestinians amounts to an ethnical cleansing strikingly similar to what happened in Europe in the second world war.
I simply can't understand a charge of ethnic cleansing when the Palestinians have been neither moved nor killed in any numbers sufficient to put a dent in their demographic trends.
I assume that you don't agree, but then how do you explain all the reports about Israeli soldiers shooting children up close in cold blood? Or herding large number of civilians into a building and then bombing it? What about the graffiti the soldiers had written in Gaza with statements like "Death to all arabs"? I can look up the links for you if you want me to.
Please post links, as the only one of those stories I've ever seen remotely substantiated is the graffiti. Oh, and the one about the use of phosphorous shells; that's just fucking wrong and if there was a responsible, reliable venue to which to extradite the bastards responsible I'd say go for it -- I only regret that extraditing IDF officials for using phosphorous would probably just lead to fallacious charges in a kangaroo court of "genocide" or something like that.
At first glance it might seem odd that a people who only 65 years ago were victims of such horrible acts would turn around and do the same thing to others, but it's really not that strange; it's a common pattern -- just think of how people who were abused as children tend to be the ones who themselves abuse children later in their lifes! It really comes down to not being able to forgive the terrible things that have been done to you, and therefore hanging on to the suffering, and then, unintentionally, ending up perpetuating the same kind of actions. I have observed that kind of pattern in my own life, where I have treated people who were close to me badly, and later thought "Why in the world did I act like that", and then realized that I had been similarly treated badly earlier in my life and had not fully recovered from it, and that was what was causing my behavior. What we're seeing in Israel's behaviour is
AFAIK, Israel invaded Palestine becuase Palestine was about to invade Israel. Pre-emptive invasion of a hostile neighbor, is not the same as invasion of a peacful neighbor that won't do what you want (The reason we went to war with Iraq the first time, to liberate Kuwait).
I know that, but I just think that it's more moral to withdraw and prepare a harsh retaliation for the inevitable invasion attempt than to continue an occupation that leaves the Arabs with no chance whatsoever to change their ways and make peace. It's like in "Evolution of the Daleks": the Doctor had to offer them peaceful lives on a planet somewhere, or it wouldn't be OK to fight them when they reject the offer. One must offer peace, even if one knows it will be rejected, in order to justify war.
USA Today is an infotainment rag that just tells people what they want to hear. The New York Times is a reputable newspaper that tends to report the truth, except for a few lies by omission and the Iraq War stuff (for some reason 2/3s of the damn country got caught up by that). Fox News is flagrant propaganda. Al-Jazeera is somewhere in between the New York Times and Fox News.
So how do these things go together?
In reality, defendant's arguments in cases like these are, historically, as valid as the victorious parties in the preceding conflict allow them to be. That, and how useful the defendant happens to be to the victors. Just ask von Braun and friends.
There's the issue. IMHO, the question is not "were you following orders" but "would the order be carried out even if you disobeyed". I can't see where it's immoral for even a Nazi soldier to carry out an immoral order if they know that disobedience will only result in needless loss to themselves rather than saving human life or any other good.
I agree.. Though BSG is my favorite show, it does have some flaws. Sometimes it's ok, even necessary, to make a judgment even if it puts you on the wrong side of history. War is not always evil. Killing is not always evil. In fact, someone could argue that non-violence and respect for feelings is weakness.
Do you really mean those things, or are you a neoconservative ;-)?
Why should you hate someone in order to fight or war against them?
The problem is that BSG never has anyone grow a backbone and tackle a moral problem. In real life, some people do and some people don't. Only in fiction is it all or nothing.
Great question! Let me know if that ever happens.
I'm fairly sure that dilemma refers to the large-scale perception that Israel is occupying "Palestine". Which has a kernel of truth, as Israel indeed militarily occupies the West Bank, and this is quite immoral.
Of course, as my sig says, the Islamists deserve to lose because they place killing Jews over preserving the lives of their own people and building a civilization of their own. To use a sci-fi analogy, their behavior is that of Daleks.
If your country was invaded and occupied by a foreign power, would you blow yourself up to fight back?
Fuck no. I'd blow up the other guy.
Well then they could try not firing rockets into our country. Perhaps next time they want to perpetrate 8 years of rocket attacks and a terrorist intifada they'll think on that.
Yeah, and for some reason he named Jesus as "Yeshuah", which is Hebrew. This makes no sense whatsoever, as us Jews really don't consider that Jesus guy to have been a particularly godly man and get no sense of inclusion from having him named in our holy language.
But major props to the man for the obvious shout-out to Islam and Muslims.
Americans will get rid of their religious imagery when England gets rid of its monarchical imagery and the French get rid of the tricolor.
Well maybe someone would care if the entire Constitutional Amendment procedure weren't built to discourage Constitutional amendments for all but the highest and broadest purposes.
Anybody see him with a bluetooth headset :) ?
Luckily, no, Obama is not currently under the control of the Cybermen.
So who the hell else are you going to elect? A person becomes a professional politician the instant they actually achieve high office.
Freedom is the ONLY way, YEAH!
Are peoples' lives so pathetic that they have to spend inordinate amounts of time and effort to gawk at others'?
Hey, maybe the kid was a Slashdotter.
No, only the tortoises who are the Great God Om can do geometry.
The problem with that little test is that it would call me a Replicant. I'm not a Replicant; I just have a sense of flippant calm about me and don't care much for anonymous small animals.
Look, I agree with you, but you're using the wrong terms. I definitely agree that anyone can improve their health through common-sense exercise and reach a level of healthful fitness. What I disagree on is that everyone has an equally easy time reaching the level of athletic fitness commonly known as "buff". So it may turn out that while geeks can easily get fit enough to run a couple of miles without trouble (I know I am...), many geeks could have some genetic or hormonal factor that increases intelligence while decreasing the ability to get college-football-player, beat-people-up, impress-women buff.
This even makes evolutionary sense. A primitive hunter who was particularly clever could use strategy to catch and kill prey, and this would obviate the need to get as really big and strong as the dumber hunters who could only obtain meat by brute force. Evolution would therefore compromise the one trait against the other in many individuals since no circumstance ever caused the survival-selection of only individuals who were strong and smart.
Nuh-uh. I was playing along with it!
not even I need a Japanese Girlfriend hoodies
Why on Earth would that item be special? Not everyone has a fetish for Japanese girls.
It's not just Minnesota, but from what you're saying it's definitely at least an order of magnitude worse in Minnesota than elsewhere.
Playing games online for hours every night is not a good thing.
But those Templars had to die, Al Mualim ordered it!