Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: disproportionate, much?


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: disproportionate, much? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/29/2008 11:57:40 PM   
GreedyTop


Posts: 52100
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Savannah, GA
Status: offline
SB..he was referring to the entire 'civilized world', not the Israelis. 

Again, lets chalk this up to things not translating across the Atlantic.

_____________________________

polysnortatious
Supreme Goddess of Snark
CHARTER MEMBER: Lance's Fag Hags!
Waiting for my madman in a Blue Box.

(in reply to piratecommander)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 12:03:45 AM   
piratecommander


Posts: 895
Joined: 8/20/2008
Status: offline
A man's answer Slaveboyforyou .

So now can we get on with some honest peaceful bickering ?

(I might need a break soon , I have the entire "civilised" world to take on)

Pirate

(anyone got an update on the body count so far ?)

(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 12:25:19 AM   
popeye1250


Posts: 18104
Joined: 1/27/2006
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
"We should not involve ourselves in foreign entanglements."
                       -George Washington-

"Racism?"
Which race are you referring to, caucasoid, negroid or mongoloid?
Last time I checked "Jewish" was a religion not a race.

_____________________________

"But Your Honor, this is not a Jury of my Peers, these people are all decent, honest, law-abiding citizens!"

(in reply to piratecommander)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 12:41:21 AM   
piratecommander


Posts: 895
Joined: 8/20/2008
Status: offline
You raise an interesting point about the European attitude regarding the US / Israel friendship thing.I can see reasons but I cant see the point of discussing this.
It could be an interesting discussion for a later occasion.

Pirate

(in reply to slaveboyforyou)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 12:45:37 AM   
piratecommander


Posts: 895
Joined: 8/20/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: popeye1250

"We should not involve ourselves in foreign entanglements."
                       -George Washington-

"Racism?"
Which race are you referring to, caucasoid, negroid or mongoloid?
Last time I checked "Jewish" was a religion not a race.


Me .... I don't recall using the term "Jewish"

(thanks for the confirmation that Jewish is a religion , not a race or nation , this may be enlightening to some on this thread)

Pirate

< Message edited by piratecommander -- 12/30/2008 12:46:46 AM >

(in reply to popeye1250)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 1:03:49 AM   
ArticMaestro


Posts: 178
Joined: 12/8/2008
Status: offline
The term "Race" is basically meaningless.  There really are no "races" of people, so Jews are not a "Race".  They are however an ethnic group, virtually all descended from common ancestors who were driven from thier homes in 70 AD.  Read what has been learned through DNA analysis about this stuff.  Jews in India, Sub sarahan Africa, Middle east, and Europe all share a set of the same genes, and clearly have common ancestors, despite having turned various colors.

"Nation" is another word that has a few different meanings, and Jews certainly do qualify for most of them.

What exactly would, "some on this thread",  find enlightening about your false belief that Jews are neither a "race" or a nation?

(in reply to piratecommander)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 1:07:23 AM   
GreedyTop


Posts: 52100
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Savannah, GA
Status: offline
SB- just a minor (or not) point:  Israel has only been a nation since 1947.

_____________________________

polysnortatious
Supreme Goddess of Snark
CHARTER MEMBER: Lance's Fag Hags!
Waiting for my madman in a Blue Box.

(in reply to ArticMaestro)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 1:26:24 AM   
piratecommander


Posts: 895
Joined: 8/20/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: ArticMaestro

The term "Race" is basically meaningless.  There really are no "races" of people, so Jews are not a "Race"........................



...............................................................................................................your false belief that Jews are neither a "race"



You're having a Giraffe here surely mate ?

Pirate

(translation of the slang use of the word Giraffe available upon request)

(in reply to ArticMaestro)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 1:38:47 AM   
blacksword404


Posts: 2068
Joined: 1/4/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

If they were the least bit rational, they'd figure out that lobbing missiles at the Jewish folk is counterproductive



Depends on what the goal is. The goal for Hamas is to get more land from Israel and wear them down over time. Which is working. They are a much smaller force so they know damn well they can't fight them head on. So they poke and prod Israel until they react. Then when the bombs and tanks start blowing up shit in Palestine they play the media like a drum. Poor us. Look at the carnage. The mayhem Israel is causing us. Peace is brokered for some more land for the Palestinians and all is quiet for a while. Then after some time has passed, then come the mortars and suicide bombers again. It keeps increasing until Israel once again has to put a stop to it. And repeat.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

Hiding weapons in schools, mosques, etc... using the "challenged" as bombers or hiding behind woman and children? No problem. Then whine to the heavens when these places get hit and civilians get hurt. What kind of total bullshit is that?
Dear Hamas and other assorted fuck weasels,
Stop putting your arms etc.. in and around public places, you cowardly pieces of shit.

And I'm with those that think Hamas/the Palestinians might want to rethink their tactics. AND the total fucking hypocrisy exhibited by the Arab world and others, as mentioned in this thread, is mind-numbing.
Proportionality? What a fucking joke. If somebody keeps stomping on your foot you don't simply stomp on their foot in return. After about the 5th time you stomp their guts out."  Maxurlife



It's part of their strategy. It gets the media on their side. The media does not give a fuck about Israel or Hamas. They do care about civilians. So they hide behind civilians and use them as shields. Which gets civilians killed. It forces the media to focus on the civilians and who is killing them and not who started it.

_____________________________

Don't fight him. Embrace your inner asshole.

Tu fellas magnus penum meum...iterum

Genuine catnip/kryptonite.
Ego sum erus.

The capacity to learn is a gift, the ability to learn a skill, the willingness to learn a choice. Dune HH

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 2:05:13 AM   
piratecommander


Posts: 895
Joined: 8/20/2008
Status: offline
Who started it ? When did it start ?

Pirate

(any news on the body count ?)

(in reply to blacksword404)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 2:53:18 AM   
slaveboyforyou


Posts: 3607
Joined: 1/6/2005
From: Arkansas, U.S.A.
Status: offline
quote:

SB- just a minor (or not) point:  Israel has only been a nation since 1947.


I'm aware of that Greedy.  We've been allied with them since then.  We have historical and political reasons for doing that.  Jews have been a part of this country since it's inception.  The U.S. has the second largest Jewish population in the world.  Most Americans are supportive of Israel.  So Israel has a lot of pull with our government, because they have a lot of native supporters.  Likewise, we have a lot of influence over Israel's decisions. 

Israel has been the only democratic country in that region, and they are strategically important to us.  They provide us with a lot of our intelligence, and they've done so for a long time.  We aren't getting nothing in return for our support of them. 

Now I don't agree with everyone of Israel's policies, but I certainly support their right to defend themselves from extremists who have publically said they will never compromise.  Honestly, the Arab world should thank us for our influence in Israel.  Israel values our opinion, and it's one of the big reasons they show the amount of restraint they do.  They could go into the Palestinian territories tomorrow and completely destroy it.  They don't have to compromise with them at all, but they do.   

(in reply to GreedyTop)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 4:12:07 AM   
Roselaure


Posts: 672
Joined: 4/12/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop

SB- just a minor (or not) point:  Israel has only been a nation since 1947.


Actually, my political science wonk side is coming out.  Israel has only been a
"State" since 1947. A "nation" is a bit more loose comglomeration.

It's a religion, an ethnicity and a nation.  Also a state.  We Jews are very versatile!

_____________________________

Once conform, once do what other people do because they do it, and lethargy steals over all the finer nerves and faculties of the soul.
-Virginia Woolf

(in reply to GreedyTop)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 6:07:01 AM   
corysub


Posts: 1492
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: piratecommander

Who started it ? When did it start ?

Pirate

(any news on the body count ?)



When did it start...good question. In 1917 Lord Balfour, the British Foreign Secretary sent a letter to the Zionist leader Lord Rothschild known as "The Balfour declaration" in which he stated that Britain would use its best efforts to facilitate the establishment in Palestine as a national home for the Jewish people. At that time the population of Palestine was about 700,000 of which 575,000 were Muslims, 75,000 were Christian, and only 55,000 were Jews.
The problem is that the British had also promised Palestine to the Palestinians.
to the Palestinians! After World War 1, the League of Nations issued a mandate that favored Palestine being created as a homeland for the Jewish people. This was really not the British plan which was to keep Palestine arab and "divide and conquer" pitting Jews and against Arabs while they ruled from above, and had a buffer State to protect the Suez canal.  With WW2 on the horizon, the League became irrelevant and by 1939 the British imperialists had decisively rejected any idea of an independent Jewish state. In the same year the British government published a new White Paper restricting Jewish immigration and offering independence for Palestine within ten years. After the introduction of 75,000 more Jews into Palestine during the ensuing five years, the gates would be closed saw the demise of the League.

Fast forward to 1947 and the United Nations endorsed the creation of  a Jewish state. However, the Arabs rejected the partition compromise of 1947 (I wonder why)  and encouraged, and armed, by the British, they prepared for war in an attempt to eliminate the Zionists and to prevent the birth of the Jewish state.T he United States also announced an embargo against the nascent Israeli state and enforced it strictly. Thus in the early stages even the US backed British policy.

From than on we know about the humiliating defeat of the arab armies by the IDF
after which Israel took even more land than the United Nations had proposed...and the conflict never really has ended...right up until today's bombings in Gaza. 

It will never end...the scars are too deep..the wounds to severe on both sides, for there ever to be more than a  "calm before the next storm' situation in the mideast.  And there are political reasons for the insecure leadership of the arab  countries to keep Israel in the crosshairs of public discourse.  Further, looming ont he horizon, don't forget is Iran...a non-arab muslim state that uses Israel as a rally issue for the masses.  Tune in for the next excited broadcast from CNN or MSNBC showing Israeli jets destroying the Iranian nuclear facilities and the TV camera's showing the bodies of dead civilians.  Interestingly, the major news channels buth in the USA and overseas don't flood the screen with pictures of women and chidlren blown apart by terrorists acting in the name of Allah as they pull the ripcord on a bomb in a shopping market, a school, or a restaurant.  What we do see are the pictures of those unfortunate people killed by Israel in Gaza.

The body count....does it make a difference.  Is that the new game in town now?
Maybe someone might start a new thread called "Guess the body count"!  Gimme a break....



(in reply to piratecommander)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 6:12:36 AM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline
Well, this thread is making another point- that the English are as forgetful as anyone else concerning the lessons of history.

"Proportionate" responses only work when two essentially reasonable countries are having a spat- such as England and Argentina over the Falklands.  Let's face it- neither country was going to get invaded, nobody was going to rattle the nuclear sabers, and civilian casualties were kept to a minimum.  Both sides clearly respected the Geneva convention.  Some ships were sunk, some airfields got bombed, airplanes got shot down, but basically it was a military vs. military clash within tightly proscribed rules.

Proportionate responses harken back to the days of Chamberlain and Hitler.  Hitler took over the Sudentenland- Chamberlain's response was well they're Germans by race anyway.  Hitler annexed Austria- well, they're happy about it.  (Not all of them were.)  Hitler marched into Czechoslavakia- well, there are some Germans there too, and if we give him this country, he'll be sated.  (The Czechs claim with more than a little justification that they were a bone thrown to Hitler and that they were betrayed by England and France.)  Chamberlain comes back waving a treaty and claims "Peace in our time."  Then Hitler attacked Poland in September 1939 and England finally went to war- Chamberlain style. But did England really go to war? Or was it a "proportionate response"?  Let's see, the orders were for the RAF to avoid attacking things like cities since civilians lived there, even if thats where the armament factories were, harbors where warships were berthed because private property might get bombed by accident, and any other military installations where civilians might get hurt.  No men on the ground were engaged.  In practice, the phony war meant RAF raids against shipping in the open seas, with a distinct lack of success  (I think the RAF didn't sink a German capital ship until 1944- not a sterling record.) or the Royal Navy doing a better job against German raiders.  Note- truth be told, the Germans were also pretty non-inflammatory in their war efforts- at least with the ocean raiders.  Merchant ships were stopped and sunk or captured as prizes but generally the crews were either well treated as captives or put into lifeboats and a distress call given a day or so later so they'd be picked up. Submarines followed the same code.

The gloves didn't come off until France was invaded and they pulled that old bulldog Churchill out of purdah who became Prime Minister in May, 1940, but by that point, Hitler had already invaded the rest of Europe.

Let's consider an interesting what if-  What if Churchill had become PM back in September 1939?  I doubt he would have been happy with the so called Phony War.  What if he prevailed upon France to attack Germany with England then?  In all likelihood, there would have been a fair chance of success- the German military machine was largely unbuilt, while the French had the largest army on the Continent, along with the most aircraft and the most tanks.  Add in some British tommies and you've got something of an invasion force that Germany would have been hard pressed to resist.

Would invading Germany have been a "proportionate response"?  Well, maybe not- but it might have stopped Hitler in his tracks, well before 50 million had died.

This is the problem with "proportionate responses".  They only work if your opponent is "reasonable".  Obviously Hitler wasn't.  Given that Hamas and plenty of other Arabs/Muslims/towelheads want to see all the Jews in the sea and are clamoring for a bloodbath, it looks to me as if they aren't reasonable either. Hence, a proportionate response is merely an invitation to keep going- its seen as weakness, not strength.  And strength is the only thing that unreasonable people respect.  The Israelis have learned that lesson well- but it looks like the English have forgotten it.

Sam

< Message edited by samboct -- 12/30/2008 6:13:43 AM >

(in reply to Roselaure)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 6:46:59 AM   
piratecommander


Posts: 895
Joined: 8/20/2008
Status: offline
Errr when did the point about the English get made ?

Pirate


(in reply to samboct)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 6:47:54 AM   
GreedyTop


Posts: 52100
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Savannah, GA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Roselaure

quote:

ORIGINAL: GreedyTop

SB- just a minor (or not) point:  Israel has only been a nation since 1947.


Actually, my political science wonk side is coming out.  Israel has only been a
"State" since 1947. A "nation" is a bit more loose comglomeration.

It's a religion, an ethnicity and a nation.  Also a state.  We Jews are very versatile!


oops, my bad... of course you're right Rose...mea culpa! 

:)

_____________________________

polysnortatious
Supreme Goddess of Snark
CHARTER MEMBER: Lance's Fag Hags!
Waiting for my madman in a Blue Box.

(in reply to Roselaure)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 7:23:39 AM   
samboct


Posts: 1817
Joined: 1/17/2007
Status: offline
"Errr when did the point about the English get made ?"

Fine- let me connect the dots for you-

1)  The English in WWII made a "proportionate response" with Herr Hitler.
2)  It didn't work.
3)  In 1982 the English made a "proportionate response" in the Falklands.
4)  It did work.

Just because the last "proportionate response" worked, doesn't mean that it worked in WWII.

Who do the Arabs/Muslims/towelheads resemble- Herr Hitler or the Argentinians?

Does that help?

Sam

(in reply to GreedyTop)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 7:39:17 AM   
manxcat


Posts: 673
Joined: 10/3/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: samboct

Hi Mia

I think that's a fine idea- but what do you do when the rest of the country doesn't want the people from New Jersey either?

Sam



Well, that's the best part of it. We'll send them to Israel!





ROFL


edited to include what i was laughing at, dunno how it got lost the first time

< Message edited by manxcat -- 12/30/2008 7:41:14 AM >


_____________________________

The television, that insidious beast, that Medusa which freezes a
billion people to stone every night, staring fixedly,
that Siren which called and sang and promised so much and gave, after all, so little.
Ray Bradbury


(in reply to bluepanda)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 7:41:44 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: piratecommander



(translation of the slang use of the word Giraffe available upon request)


Yes please, and one on handbag also if you could.

_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to piratecommander)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: disproportionate, much? - 12/30/2008 7:43:47 AM   
thishereboi


Posts: 14463
Joined: 6/19/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: piratecommander

Who started it ?
They started it.

When did it start ?
A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away.

Pirate

(any news on the body count ?)


_____________________________

"Sweetie, you're wasting your gum" .. Albert


This here is the boi formerly known as orfunboi


(in reply to piratecommander)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: disproportionate, much? Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.188