HobbyKing.com New Products Flash Sale
Reply
Thread Tools
Old Dec 01, 2012, 12:09 PM
Scotland the Brave
Dusty1000's Avatar
United Kingdom, Scotland, Glasgow
Joined Mar 2008
1,035 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob HSG View Post
But THEY don't! What part of "Kill All The Jews" and "Push The Jews Into The Sea" don't you GET?
As I've already mentioned, mass population transfer policies these days are consigned to the realms of extremists such as Islamic Jihad and Avidgor Lieberman. As Lieberman is in a far more powerful position than Islamic Jihad, a mass population transfer of Muslims and Christians is much more likely than one involving Jews, excluding from the illegal West Bank settlements back to Israel of course. But it understandable that you would feel any potential danger facing Jews, far outweighs any much more likely and more immediate danger facing Arabs.

Only when enough people advocate that everyone should have equal rights regardless of race or religion, and stand up for the oppressed rather than the oppressors, will there be peace in the middle east.

Quote:
Not to mention the abuse of everyone from Christians to Hindus in most of the Arab world.
Can you think of any Hindu or Christian population in any part of the Arab world, who are denied citizenship by those who ultimately rule over them, who are kept under military rule, who's homes are bombed by planes if they are suspected of having committed a crime, or who are forced from their land and homes to make way for settlers, apart from the Christians in the West Bank and Gaza?

Dusty
Dusty1000 is offline Find More Posts by Dusty1000
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 01, 2012, 12:27 PM
Scotland the Brave
Dusty1000's Avatar
United Kingdom, Scotland, Glasgow
Joined Mar 2008
1,035 Posts
Pope calls for Jerusalem to be freed from Zionism

Quote:
The Vatican hailed the United Nations' implicit recognition of a Palestinian state on Thursday and called for an internationally guaranteed special status for Jerusalem, something bound to irritate Israel.
Dusty1000 is offline Find More Posts by Dusty1000
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 01, 2012, 02:40 PM
Registered User
United States, NC, Surf City
Joined Oct 2003
389 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty1000 View Post
Of course, if the majority of the population (as defined above) wants Israel to be a Jewish state.



It's not as if there haven't been pogroms etc in Islamic countries, but before Zionism, Jews were welcome in most Islamic countries particularly in the middle east, for most of history, whereas that situation has now reversed. Which is the main reason why even though the one state solution might seem to be fairer, and in my opinion is what will more than likely eventually happen, two states learning to live side by side in peace, with Israel having a Jewish majority, would seem to be the best solution at this time. So the sooner Israel starts dealing with the refugees as I mentioned, the better.

One thing worth noting is that most anti-semitism throughout history in both Christian and Muslim countries, seems to have been religious based. I had never heard of the term ''Jewish deicide'' before reading that article. That's something that won't happen again in Christian countries in the west, due to the death of Christianity. For most of the remaining fundamentalist Christians in the west, Muslims are the new devil, as we see expressed here on this forum. While Jews are generally considered to be ''people like us,'' and people talk about ''Judeo-Christian values'' etc. I certainly don't recall ever seeing any Christian post anything anti-semitic on this forum, based on Christianity. While such anti-Muslim posts by Christians are prevalent, some even comparing Islam to devil worshiping, just like Christians used to do with Judaism. A fear even among some non-Christians, is that Muslims want to take over western countries by becoming the majority and to instill their own laws, as we also see expressed on this forum, which is another fear that never existed with Jews.

So while there may once have been good reason for Jews to have their own state, somewhere, those reasons don't seem to exist anymore, and Jews can now live quite comfortably throughout the west. Can you think of any reasons why there might be any widespread anti-semitism in the west in the future, other than because of Israel?

Dusty
Have you never heard of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? That hoax was used to justify European anti-Semitism and was the fertilizer for the Nazi movement. Many (including some here in LTUP) still fear an International Zionist Conspiracy. Most Russians believe it, which is so ironic considering how many of the original Bolsheviks were Jewish, so much so that it provided ammo for American wing-nuts for decades.

In the final analysis, we all have to stop thinking of ourselves as members of nation-states, and instead remember we are all human beings.

Have you read Kurt Vonnegut's "Cat's Cradle?" He defines a "falloon" as a group of people with imaginary or superflous things in common, and a "grand-falloon" as being a large group of people like that, and specifically mentioned nation-states.

What's done is done. If and when the Palestinians and their allies recognize that they are NOT going to get rid of "The Zionist Entity," then peace will be possible. And not until then!

BTW, the only countries in the world where Jews feel really safe are the US, the UK, and Canada. Western Europe is a close second, and the rest of the world is suspect.
Bob HSG is offline Find More Posts by Bob HSG
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 01, 2012, 02:45 PM
The original Flying Pigs Sqd.
Up&Away's Avatar
Netanya, Israel
Joined Aug 2002
10,092 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty1000 View Post
Nowadays, as most Palestinians have never set foot in Israel, and most Israelis were born in Israel, Palestinians are prepared to accept a state in the West Bank including East Jerusalem, and Gaza, which seems very generous indeed. But not generous enough for greedy Israel.
Wrong again. Arafat was offered just that, and refused. Greedy Israel? Greedy Palestinians more like it.
Up&Away is offline Find More Posts by Up&Away
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 01, 2012, 02:56 PM
Registered User
United States, NC, Surf City
Joined Oct 2003
389 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Up&Away View Post
Wrong again. Arafat was offered just that, and refused. Greedy Israel? Greedy Palestinians more like it.
It was in fact a bit of a hollow offer. If Arafat had accepted, the Knesset would have bounced Barak so fast it would have made everyone's head spin! Get it straight: the Israelis will NEVER give up East Jerusalem except if it is taken by force. And the human and cultural losses would be enormous, with ancient cities all over the region in radioactive ruins.

Gaza should be either an independent nation, or better yet, a province of Egypt. Palestinians who were born in any part of Israel before 1948 should be allowed to live anywhere they want. The rest need redress and assistance from their "brother Arabs" in the countries they currently reside. That may not be "justice," but it IS the only workable solution.

And as far as no Arab government oppressing minority populations, just what do YOU think is going on in Syria today? Ask the Copts while you're at it! Or the Jains, the BaHai, etc.
Bob HSG is offline Find More Posts by Bob HSG
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 01, 2012, 04:06 PM
Registered User
Scotland
Joined Sep 2009
66 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty1000 View Post
Only if the majority of a population wanted to deny women equal rights to men would I support any decision to do so, which would entail some women also wanting to deny themselves equal rights.

Dusty
I wouldn't. If just one woman felt aggrieved that she didn't have equal rights then I would support her over the rest of the population.
I'm not sure why you think differently.
mortato is online now Find More Posts by mortato
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 01, 2012, 04:11 PM
Registered User
Scotland
Joined Sep 2009
66 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty1000 View Post
While we consider our way of life to be more moral than the way of life in Islamic countries, they generally see us as being the immoral ones. We are the ones who have ''godless'' societies full of single parent families, lacking in ''traditional family values,'' which they see themselves as the upholders of. But just as I expect them to respect the way that we have chosen to live, I do the same for them. If a women wants to spend her life at home, and obey her husband, who are we to tell her otherwise?

Societies in Islamic countries today aren't too different from what western societies were like, not so long ago. Just as women have more or less now gained equal rights in the west, the same is happening in Muslim countries in the middle east. Even though most of them still have a long way to go, they are generally moving in the same direction as we did. If one thing's been proven, it's that invading countries to instill our way of life on them, and propping up secular dictators over religious populations, does nothing for women's rights etc in those countries, as they descend back into the dark ages as radicals always end up taking over. Such actions also help to radicalise the populations, making matters even worse.

So I believe the best thing to do is to respect that people choose to live their lives as they see fit, and give them positive encouragement to help their societies modernise, as we have done. Rather than spend vast amounts of money attacking other countries, we could give a fraction of it to women's rights groups in those countries instead.

Dusty
Our society (western democracy)is better than any theocracy. And demonstrably so. And I think you agree as you say you hope that Islamic theocracies are heading towards western style democracies.
How can you respect people who are bullying others? I don't respect them at all. How would you give money to Saudi women?
What makes you think that my only solution is invasion?
mortato is online now Find More Posts by mortato
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 01, 2012, 04:32 PM
E-flyer since 1981
Michael in Toronto's Avatar
Joined Oct 2000
1,501 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty1000 View Post
Can you think of any reasons why there might be any widespread anti-semitism in the west in the future, other than because of Israel?

Dusty
Yes.

The question is why you choose to ignore every reason except one to further your argument.
Michael in Toronto is offline Find More Posts by Michael in Toronto
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 01, 2012, 04:34 PM
E-flyer since 1981
Michael in Toronto's Avatar
Joined Oct 2000
1,501 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty1000 View Post
As I've already mentioned, mass population transfer policies these days are consigned to the realms of extremists such as Islamic Jihad and Avidgor Lieberman.

Dusty
It seems Avigdor Lieberman is a new and popular target for you to vilify.

Avigdor Lieberman is a politician.

He is powerless to act like the criminals you compare him to.
Michael in Toronto is offline Find More Posts by Michael in Toronto
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 01, 2012, 05:09 PM
The original Flying Pigs Sqd.
Up&Away's Avatar
Netanya, Israel
Joined Aug 2002
10,092 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob HSG View Post
It was in fact a bit of a hollow offer. If Arafat had accepted, the Knesset would have bounced Barak so fast it would have made everyone's head spin! Get it straight: the Israelis will NEVER give up East Jerusalem except if it is taken by force. And the human and cultural losses would be enormous, with ancient cities all over the region in radioactive ruins.
You don't know that. Nobody does. Arafat made sure of that.

Quote:
Gaza should be either an independent nation, or better yet, a province of Egypt. Palestinians who were born in any part of Israel before 1948 should be allowed to live anywhere they want. The rest need redress and assistance from their "brother Arabs" in the countries they currently reside. That may not be "justice," but it IS the only workable solution.
Ideally, yes. Practically, no.
Up&Away is offline Find More Posts by Up&Away
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 02, 2012, 09:09 AM
Registered User
Israel, Jerusalem
Joined May 2007
142 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dusty1000 View Post
Only if the majority of a population wanted to deny women equal rights to men would I support any decision to do so, which would entail some women also wanting to deny themselves equal rights.

While we consider our way of life to be more moral than the way of life in Islamic countries, they generally see us as being the immoral ones. We are the ones who have ''godless'' societies full of single parent families, lacking in ''traditional family values,'' which they see themselves as the upholders of. But just as I expect them to respect the way that we have chosen to live, I do the same for them. If a women wants to spend her life at home, and obey her husband, who are we to tell her otherwise?

Societies in Islamic countries today aren't too different from what western societies were like, not so long ago. Just as women have more or less now gained equal rights in the west, the same is happening in Muslim countries in the middle east. Even though most of them still have a long way to go, they are generally moving in the same direction as we did. If one thing's been proven, it's that invading countries to instill our way of life on them, and propping up secular dictators over religious populations, does nothing for women's rights etc in those countries, as they descend back into the dark ages as radicals always end up taking over. Such actions also help to radicalise the populations, making matters even worse.

So I believe the best thing to do is to respect that people choose to live their lives as they see fit, and give them positive encouragement to help their societies modernise, as we have done. Rather than spend vast amounts of money attacking other countries, we could give a fraction of it to women's rights groups in those countries instead.

Dusty
Which does of course mean that you would support your rights as man denied, as long as there is a majority, including at least one man and all the women.
Or the Palestinians right as long as there is a majority which includes one Palestinian.
S_YORAM1@BEZEQIN is online now Find More Posts by S_YORAM1@BEZEQIN
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 02, 2012, 09:33 AM
Registered User
United States, NC, Surf City
Joined Oct 2003
389 Posts
I wonder how educated Palestinian women currently living in Israel would feel about becoming subject to Sharia. Not to mention the gays.
Bob HSG is offline Find More Posts by Bob HSG
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 02, 2012, 12:58 PM
Scotland the Brave
Dusty1000's Avatar
United Kingdom, Scotland, Glasgow
Joined Mar 2008
1,035 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob HSG View Post
Have you never heard of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? That hoax was used to justify European anti-Semitism and was the fertilizer for the Nazi movement. Many (including some here in LTUP) still fear an International Zionist Conspiracy. Most Russians believe it, which is so ironic considering how many of the original Bolsheviks were Jewish, so much so that it provided ammo for American wing-nuts for decades.
The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was one of the ''fertilisers'' for the Nazi movement. Are you able to support your claim that ''most Russians'' believe it? Many Russians may well believe it, just as many Americans believe Muslims are planning to take over the world, and that jihadwatch.com and relgionofpeace.com accurately describe Islam. Some people think the Rothschilds rule the world, while others think it's aliens. Some think it's the British Royal Family, including one here on LTUP. Some people think President Obama is a communist, who plans to ruin the US, including some here on LTUP. People believe all sorts of conspiracy theories, but beliefs such as these will always be on the fringes of modern societies, even if they are more prevalent in some countries than in others.

Hitler was brought up as a catholic and made many references to ''doing God's work'' as he saw it, and blamed Jews for the demise of what he perceived to be ''Christian values'' in Germany. The catholic church didn't take the official position that Jews today should not be held responsible for killing Christ until the 1960s, and most Europeans in the 1930s were decidedly more Christian than they are nowadays. In the 1930s the UK still had an empire which was originally colonised by the biggest navy in the world, which was originally financed by N.M. Rothschild and Son, after the same bank financed the British victory over Napoleon, then bailed out the Bank of England. So I very much doubt the Protocols of the Elders of Zion by itself, would have been a significant factor, without being able to point the finger at some actual ''international Jewish financiers,'' who could be said to be responsible for wars and ruling the world etc. But the world is a changed place. There is no British empire, there is no dominant bank nowadays like there was in the early 1800s, and most bankers are not Jewish like they used to be. So without any individuals to even point the finger at, such conspiracy theories are unlikely to be believed by informed people, and people these days are becoming increasingly informed.

Is the Protocols of the Elder's of Zion the main thing you think might cause widespread anti-semitism in the future?

Quote:
In the final analysis, we all have to stop thinking of ourselves as members of nation-states, and instead remember we are all human beings.
But we are all members of nation states, many of which define themselves by the religious beliefs of the majority of their populations. That's reality, and is likely to remain so for some time to come. In the final analysis, there is only one race.

Quote:
Have you read Kurt Vonnegut's "Cat's Cradle?" He defines a "falloon" as a group of people with imaginary or superflous things in common, and a "grand-falloon" as being a large group of people like that, and specifically mentioned nation-states.
I had never heard of it. People do exist in groups and imagine they have things in common, such as race and religion, just as they always have done. Nation states are the modern day equivalent of tribes. As both racism and religion are on the decline, and the barriers for nation states are coming down, if we continue on this path then one day there will be no racism, no religion, and no nation states, and the world will probably be better off for it.

Quote:
What's done is done. If and when the Palestinians and their allies recognize that they are NOT going to get rid of "The Zionist Entity," then peace will be possible. And not until then!
Like I said, mass population transfers are the policies of only the extremists these days, such as Islamic Jihad and Avidgor Lieberman. There's no point in trying to paint the more moderate parties with your broad brush. Ever since Hamas was elected, it has been their position that they would accept a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders, in compliance with international law and international consensus. While Israel with Netanyahu at the helm has moved in the opposite direction, by expelling more and more Palestinians from their homes, building more and more settlements in further violation of international law, which causes more and more violent resistance from the Palestinians.

Only when Israel obeys international law, will peace be possible. And not until then!

Quote:
BTW, the only countries in the world where Jews feel really safe are the US, the UK, and Canada. Western Europe is a close second, and the rest of the world is suspect.
Don't you think the US, UK and Canada are far safer refuges, than a tiny country in the middle east?

As has been suggested on this forum before, somewhere along the US/Canadian border would be a far safer place for a Jewish state, and one the size of Israel would only take up a tiny fraction of the total land mass of the US and Canada.

Dusty
Dusty1000 is offline Find More Posts by Dusty1000
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 02, 2012, 01:04 PM
Scotland the Brave
Dusty1000's Avatar
United Kingdom, Scotland, Glasgow
Joined Mar 2008
1,035 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Up&Away View Post
Wrong again. Arafat was offered just that, and refused.
No, Arafat wasn't offered that. But feel free to tell us when you would claim Arafat was offered that, and I'll provide the facts which will prove you wrong.

The last negotiations involving Arafat were at Taba, where Israel said they would improve on what they offered at Camp David in 2000, and Arafat agreed that such would be a good basis for negotiations. It was Israel which then walked away from the talks, and refused to deal with Arafat any more.

Quote:
Greedy Israel? Greedy Palestinians more like it.
No, greedy Israel.

Dusty
Dusty1000 is offline Find More Posts by Dusty1000
Reply With Quote
Old Dec 02, 2012, 01:06 PM
Scotland the Brave
Dusty1000's Avatar
United Kingdom, Scotland, Glasgow
Joined Mar 2008
1,035 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by mortato View Post
I wouldn't. If just one woman felt aggrieved that she didn't have equal rights then I would support her over the rest of the population.
I'm not sure why you think differently.
So would I. That's why I suggested supporting women's rights organisations in such countries, instead of invading them.

I'm not sure why you think I think differently.

Dusty
Dusty1000 is offline Find More Posts by Dusty1000
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Category Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Discussion The UN-shouted at by angry Tea Partiers in 18th-century fancy dress. aerogel Life, The Universe, and Politics 13 Sep 02, 2012 10:42 AM
Discussion Senior Palestinian official: UN bid is only alternative to violence MtnGoat Life, The Universe, and Politics 116 Sep 27, 2011 10:17 AM
Discussion How Supporters of Palestinian Terrorism Are Murdered, Raped by Palestinian Sponsor MtnGoat Life, The Universe, and Politics 277 May 06, 2011 10:27 AM