Israeli-Palestinian conflict (62 Viewers)

Is Hamas a Terrorist Organization?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Should there be a Jewish nation SOMEWHERE in the world?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Should Israel be a country located in the region it is right now?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

Enron

Tickle Me
Moderator
Oct 11, 2005
75,666
I don't really care if the "international community" calls it genocide or a game or whatever. They should have stopped it, but they didn't because it was their spoiled kid that was playing there.
There is no doubt that it should be stopped. I don't think anyone here wishes for it to continue.

But I think people do not realize the power and seriousness of words like terrorist and genocide. Especially on this forum. Those words are very specific.
 

Buy on AliExpress.com
OP

ReBeL

The Jackal
Jan 14, 2005
22,871
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #2,902
    I think many Arabs think that the Jews are allowed to do these massacres because of the holocaust. You know, the West owes the Jews at least this much.
    That is totally right. European politicians are so coward to say something against Israeli massacres now because they don't want to be accused of being Anti-Semitic. This fear was spread all over Europe by Zionist media to make them keep silent about Zionist doings in Palestine. And nobody can deny that.
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,666
    The word should be used for true terrorists I believe.
    Sure, if you're going to call someone a terrorist, it is probably right that they actually be one. Here in lies the problem.

    What do you consider a "true terrorist"? Is it the righteousness of a cause that defines whether someone is terrorist or freedom fighter? Or is it something else? And in that case what is righteous? Which causes are better than the others?
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,666
    It depends on how you see it, but I myself wouldn't call it a genocide, no. But you could argue it was. At a certain point were a lot of killings and they did happen with the intent to break them.
    True. I think time frame probably plays into it as well. But who is to say what the statute of limitations on a genocide is?
     

    Bjerknes

    "Top Economist"
    Mar 16, 2004
    116,244
    It's not about some authority stating it. It's difficult to understand whether or not there was the intent to destroy a people and how exactly it was done. A genocide requires a plan. That's what was decided in the Yugoslavia case anyway (Alen can correct me on this one though, it's just one of the cases I've read now that I'm studying law).
    Israel has a plan, named Operation Cast Lead, which called for attacking Palestinian sites EVEN WHILE THEY WERE NEGOTIATING A CEASE FIRE. They have a plan, and the numbers speak for themselves.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11521
     
    OP

    ReBeL

    The Jackal
    Jan 14, 2005
    22,871
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #2,906
    If you count the Indians, yes. What you could claim though is that the USA, like Belgium, are guilty for allowing genocide to happen.
    I love how you put a gay country like Belgium during speaking about World politics although everybody knows it doesn't have any impact on anything.
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,666
    Israel has a plan, named Operation Cast Lead, which called for attacking Palestinian sites EVEN WHILE THEY WERE NEGOTIATING A CEASE FIRE. They have a plan, and the numbers speak for themselves.

    http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=11521
    Yes people do tend to plan invasions, they aren't generally spur of the moment initiatives. Planning an invasion during a cease fire is probably cheating on some level. All the article speaks of is the planning behind the invasion, but doesn't even mention the idea of a systematic killing.
     

    Bjerknes

    "Top Economist"
    Mar 16, 2004
    116,244
    There is no doubt that it should be stopped. I don't think anyone here wishes for it to continue.

    But I think people do not realize the power and seriousness of words like terrorist and genocide. Especially on this forum. Those words are very specific.
    If that is aimed at me, I think a terrorist constitutes someone who invokes terror into people, whether it be through lethal force or through even threatening something like unfair incarceration. It doesn't matter whether it's the government or some lobbyist group who does it.

    So therefore, any entity can be a terrorist. Paulson came to the House before the big drop in the stock market in October threatening martial law if the banker bailout was not passed. This has been reported in mainstream news. That is terrorism itself.
     

    Enron

    Tickle Me
    Moderator
    Oct 11, 2005
    75,666
    If that is aimed at me, I think a terrorist constitutes someone who invokes terror into people, whether it be through lethal force or through even threatening something like unfair incarceration. It doesn't matter whether it's the government or some lobbyist group who does it.

    So therefore, any entity can be a terrorist. Paulson came to the House before the big drop in the stock market in October threatening martial law if the banker bailout was not passed. This has been reported in mainstream news. That is terrorism itself.
    Exactly.
     

    Bjerknes

    "Top Economist"
    Mar 16, 2004
    116,244
    Yes people do tend to plan invasions, they aren't generally spur of the moment initiatives. Planning an invasion during a cease fire is probably cheating on some level. All the article speaks of is the planning behind the invasion, but doesn't even mention the idea of a systematic killing.
    OK, so this isn't a genocide then.

    That must mean it's just an unfortunate mistake that so many innocent people have died, which is why Israeli spokesmen always claim, "we are sorry for the innocent loss of life."

    I guess this is why it will continue, too.
     
    OP

    ReBeL

    The Jackal
    Jan 14, 2005
    22,871
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #2,919
    Yes people do tend to plan invasions, they aren't generally spur of the moment initiatives. Planning an invasion during a cease fire is probably cheating on some level. All the article speaks of is the planning behind the invasion, but doesn't even mention the idea of a systematic killing.
    If you want the initial plan for systematic killing, read the books of early Zionists. Theodor Hertzl for example.
     

    tibike

    Senior Member
    Dec 11, 2007
    1,147
    That is totally right. European politicians are so coward to say something against Israeli massacres now because they don't want to be accused of being Anti-Semitic. This fear was spread all over Europe by Zionist media to make them keep silent about Zionist doings in Palestine. And nobody can deny that.
    Wrong, European politicans are afraid to say anything against ANY minority, be it Jews, Muslims, Gypsies, anyone. We call it "politically correct" while in fact, if you say something against a minority, chances are you will be labeled as a racist, and that's where the fear comes from, and not Zionism.
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 9, Guests: 47)