Israel - Palestine

[SirRumpole]

....the answer will be just the Jewish people and that's about it..... disgusting.

The British who were bombed and rocketed by V1's, ?

The Germans in Dresden who were bombed by the British ?

The Russians who lost 35 million soldiers and 14 million civilians ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#Human_losses_by_country

 

[DeepState]

1. RY,

What a clown.


2. Last I checked, my homeland is not Vietnam, but Australia.


3. Maybe I should do what you do and copy/paste and take things literally, word for word, out of context... But unlike some, I remember things I read... just maybe too optimistic that others are honest about what they clearly wrote.


4. Are you kidding me about the survey?
What a fool you are man.
Let me school you between when to take things literally and when to take what's important in a sentence.


5. "I bet you RY is such an idiot that he will count one, two, three as.... what? You're the idiot."


6. The "I bet" mean: it probably is true that RY, when reading this sentence will say that last 3 words in his head first before the end of the sentence.


7. It doesn't mean I'm willing to literally bet my house on you reading the entire sentence, word for word, you idiot.


8. I'm not going to dignify your moronic mental retardation about the survey... Jesus, Mary and Joseph.


9. Oh, when I say Israel fighting in my name, I must literally mean it has my name and when its leadership say it's democratic etc etc and fighting for western values etc etc and "what would you do"... it then point to the book of names it meant by the word "you".

10. sheeshhh...

---------


11. And what's this about me thinking that China or Chinese being evil?

Oh, drawing similarities between a corrupt dictatorship in China with Israel... that's apt.

13. You're off topic... go back to your investment fluff, i'll get there soon and make a fool out of you on your own turf.

1. That's funny. Honk honk.


2. Last time I looked, you identified yourself as Vietnamese.
home•land: the country where someone was born or grew up. Ones’ fathers land.
When was the last time you checked the meaning of homeland?

3. Provide one piece where I have misquoted one thing you have said and where context was not clear either through the entire text or within a text response. If valid, I will then supply example upon example of oblique responses to direct questions. Or you can just read the thread responses in total, simply observing the number of objections from other posters that make coherent arguments but accuse you of putting words their mouth or not acknowledging valid disagreement with flawed argument. If something systematic is going on, you don’t need to look very far and balance of probability does not lie in your favour.


4. You are quite seriously in no position to school me on any such matter, actually. However, there are a large number of people who could school you in how vile your morality is in the two sentences you wrote. Your bet can be literal or figurative. I don’t care. It is vile. If you want to back these statements I am calling you to verify their truth given how incendiary they are. Can you not see through the literal words and see the underlying intent? Do you think I am unable to distinguish between posit and contingent claim? And this indignant retort, coming from a person who sees fit to need to explain that the contents of YouTube contain more that videos of cats.


5. Can you afford this bet? You aren't going to have anything left after the previous one. Literally.


6. You actually use this as a contrast to the question you posed? You are disgusting, vile, unappreciative and abhorrent. If you dig yourself any deeper into this, you will meet Professor Otto Lidenbrock as he jouneys to the centre of the earth. You really have no concept about what you say and how vile and offensive it actually is. This is strike three. And this is such a central part to your proposition.


7. It indicates you are willing to take a bet. Confirmed by repeat. What's left is the wager that we have yet to negotiate. I have suggested one wager. You are clearly baulking. This question has sentiments which have been repeated several times on the thread and must be a position you hold to be true. Unless so much of the drivel you have outlined here is just some broken effort at communication at misrepresents what you actually mean. "The cat sat on the mat"....no no no, you fool, I meant "War with Palestine is bad." Since we are into schooling, alternative phrases might be "I believe that...", "I suspect, were you to...", "It might be that..." there are many more. However, given you presume to lecture me about writing and communication, I presume that you do not know the weight of your words or their import. I’m not sure if that’s mitigation for the disgusting view point which has been raised.


8. How about you dignify yourself and the other posters whom you have interchanged with and conduct it for real to make your point? The questions are there. Their answers seem central to your position and general train of anti-Israeli sentiment. You could just post it under a new thread:

"With regards to WWII, who suffered? 1. The Jews and that's about it? 2. More than the Jews suffered. 3. From what sick mind does a question like this arise?"

....,or I can?
Are you unable to fathom that the key point behind the bet is to subject your disgraceful perspective to public scrutiny? But, if you wish to back it with more than embarrassment and being howled down much more vehemently than anything which has come before, I’d happy to formalise the bet as written.

9. Given the vehemence of your moral outrage, your name must have been in the engagement orders to the Israeli military in a deeply personal sense. Nothing else makes sense. You have said that it has been. If, in the conduct of war, strategies are undertaken to establish credibility, usher support and such within the world communitity, what do you expect them to do? They would call the penguins as supporters in Antarctica too if that had strategic value. So would/has Australia in the name of you and your values. And you blow a vessel with that and stand on your high horse of indigation...which I'm going to enjoy riding around on. Do you see the hyprocrisy in that position? That is a key feature in your argument and I am shining a light on it.

Building credibility is standard warfare 101. And you take it literally that they did this in the name of you, your family and country. You write as such and you express moral outrage at it. That’s what the Google and YouTube bits are about. You want to talk to me about distinguishing literal and other translation? Do you, for the slightest micro-second think that those searches would yield anything? Israel is not doing this in your name – get it?

Let me school you between when to take things literally and when to take what's important in a sentence

Your school was deregistered a while back...but they let you keep the conical hat that you wore so much. However, you continue to lecture as if it wasn’t deregistered. The above is the result.


10. A lot of that goes around your threads. Are you trying to invite yourself to the party?


11. That’s all you got from the comparison between China and Israel? OK.


12. You are calling Off-Topic at all – never mind the content of what was written? Is that some sort of joke? And on the topic, it relates your entrenched views about the role and methods of Israel in the Palestinian conflict. If that is off topic, then please remove all your posts and I will be happy to match it with the removal of this paragraph.

Was that a threat? I think I got slapped by a wet lettuce. I look forward to ‘debating’ you on finance fluff. I look forward to being told that Warren Buffett is wrong (again), same with Bogle, being told that conservative is 100% equities,….mate, if you wan’t to engage, I’m going to do you slowly. Better still, I’ll just sit back and let you unravel yourself. The power of index management. Apparently, anything that’s good and important about investments has been written by Fisher and Graham., with wisdom snippets from members of your extended family. There really is no value you bring beyond this. We just upload two books and give your family logins. Save your time..

 

[luutzu]

The British who were bombed and rocketed by V1's, ?

The Germans in Dresden who were bombed by the British ?

The Russians who lost 35 million soldiers and 14 million civilians ?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties#Human_losses_by_country

Yes, it can be disgusting to make it out as if your people were the only one, or the ones who suffered the most, during WW2.

It is also disgusting to use the deaths and murder of your people to defend your crimes against criticisms, to use it as justification for committing the same racist policies against the minorities in your own country, committing the same crimes against a people whose land your God somehow had given you.



I agree, it is disgusting.

 

[luutzu]

1. That's funny. Honk honk.


2. Last time I looked, you identified yourself as Vietnamese.
home•land: the country where someone was born or grew up. Ones’ fathers land.
When was the last time you checked the meaning of homeland?

3. Provide one piece where I have misquoted one thing you have said and where context was not clear either through the entire text or within a text response. If valid, I will then supply example upon example of oblique responses to direct questions. Or you can just read the thread responses in total, simply observing the number of objections from other posters that make coherent arguments but accuse you of putting words their mouth or not acknowledging valid disagreement with flawed argument. If something systematic is going on, you don’t need to look very far and balance of probability does not lie in your favour.


4. You are quite seriously in no position to school me on any such matter, actually. However, there are a large number of people who could school you in how vile your morality is in the two sentences you wrote. Your bet can be literal or figurative. I don’t care. It is vile. If you want to back these statements I am calling you to verify their truth given how incendiary they are. Can you not see through the literal words and see the underlying intent? Do you think I am unable to distinguish between posit and contingent claim? And this indignant retort, coming from a person who sees fit to need to explain that the contents of YouTube contain more that videos of cats.


5. Can you afford this bet? You aren't going to have anything left after the previous one. Literally.


6. You actually use this as a contrast to the question you posed? You are disgusting, vile, unappreciative and abhorrent. If you dig yourself any deeper into this, you will meet Professor Otto Lidenbrock as he jouneys to the centre of the earth. You really have no concept about what you say and how vile and offensive it actually is. This is strike three. And this is such a central part to your proposition.


7. It indicates you are willing to take a bet. Confirmed by repeat. What's left is the wager that we have yet to negotiate. I have suggested one wager. You are clearly baulking. This question has sentiments which have been repeated several times on the thread and must be a position you hold to be true. Unless so much of the drivel you have outlined here is just some broken effort at communication at misrepresents what you actually mean. "The cat sat on the mat"....no no no, you fool, I meant "War with Palestine is bad." Since we are into schooling, alternative phrases might be "I believe that...", "I suspect, were you to...", "It might be that..." there are many more. However, given you presume to lecture me about writing and communication, I presume that you do not know the weight of your words or their import. I’m not sure if that’s mitigation for the disgusting view point which has been raised.


8. How about you dignify yourself and the other posters whom you have interchanged with and conduct it for real to make your point? The questions are there. Their answers seem central to your position and general train of anti-Israeli sentiment. You could just post it under a new thread:

"With regards to WWII, who suffered? 1. The Jews and that's about it? 2. More than the Jews suffered. 3. From what sick mind does a question like this arise?"

....,or I can?
Are you unable to fathom that the key point behind the bet is to subject your disgraceful perspective to public scrutiny? But, if you wish to back it with more than embarrassment and being howled down much more vehemently than anything which has come before, I’d happy to formalise the bet as written.

9. Given the vehemence of your moral outrage, your name must have been in the engagement orders to the Israeli military in a deeply personal sense. Nothing else makes sense. You have said that it has been. If, in the conduct of war, strategies are undertaken to establish credibility, usher support and such within the world communitity, what do you expect them to do? They would call the penguins as supporters in Antarctica too if that had strategic value. So would/has Australia in the name of you and your values. And you blow a vessel with that and stand on your high horse of indigation...which I'm going to enjoy riding around on. Do you see the hyprocrisy in that position? That is a key feature in your argument and I am shining a light on it.

Building credibility is standard warfare 101. And you take it literally that they did this in the name of you, your family and country. You write as such and you express moral outrage at it. That’s what the Google and YouTube bits are about. You want to talk to me about distinguishing literal and other translation? Do you, for the slightest micro-second think that those searches would yield anything? Israel is not doing this in your name – get it?



Your school was deregistered a while back...but they let you keep the conical hat that you wore so much. However, you continue to lecture as if it wasn’t deregistered. The above is the result.


10. A lot of that goes around your threads. Are you trying to invite yourself to the party?


11. That’s all you got from the comparison between China and Israel? OK.


12. You are calling Off-Topic at all – never mind the content of what was written? Is that some sort of joke? And on the topic, it relates your entrenched views about the role and methods of Israel in the Palestinian conflict. If that is off topic, then please remove all your posts and I will be happy to match it with the removal of this paragraph.

Was that a threat? I think I got slapped by a wet lettuce. I look forward to ‘debating’ you on finance fluff. I look forward to being told that Warren Buffett is wrong (again), same with Bogle, being told that conservative is 100% equities,….mate, if you wan’t to engage, I’m going to do you slowly. Better still, I’ll just sit back and let you unravel yourself. The power of index management. Apparently, anything that’s good and important about investments has been written by Fisher and Graham., with wisdom snippets from members of your extended family. There really is no value you bring beyond this. We just upload two books and give your family logins. Save your time..

oh ok, it's good to know that according to your dictionary, the country I am a citizen of and grow up in most of my life is not my homeland.

What I've written is still up there, unedited... those interested can go back and look.
I'm not going to waste more time than I have to defend some moronic accusation.

You might as well take one of my swear words and quote it and say all i do is swear.

Is this topic about China and Israel? Or Chinese policies?


---

Regarding Investment:

And wow, shows how overpaid you were to be retiring so young when all you've done is make mediocrity and ass-covering a high art through your entire career.

You've retired, you still got the money from your "hard work".. time to reflect and laugh at the idiocy that was your career.

I've never heard anyone so proud to have spent their entire career practically saying - since I don't know anything and don't want to risk being wrong or bothered to think, I'd just spread everything everywhere and rise or fall with the rest of the market.. i'd get paid either way.

I bet you're the type that buy the whole store and give it to your wife as gifts on her birthday because you don't want to risk picking the wrong gift, one she doesn't like.

And oh, I don't literally mean I bet money that you buy the physical store too, or literally the entire store's inventory...

I think I'm beginning to see why you're on these forums... to justify the relevance of your spineless, brainless, high art of managing people's money.

And poor you, living through a war with a plane ticket to get to safety the moment it's getting too much.
I wonder how many kids in Gaza have a bus ticket to get to a refugee camp the moment a warning "knock" hit their house before a booom that destroys it.


You got no heart, and obviously no brain... so thank you for retiring so young.

 

[So_Cynical]

The Appeaser!

View attachment 58899

Chamberlain in 1935/6 is just totally irrelevant to the conflict in question, ok so perhaps not totally irrelevant due to the fact that Chamberlain and the western Europeans in general in the 1930's had had enough of war...a thousand years of war and they had finally had enough.

40 years of winning wars and the Israeli appetite for war is still very strong...Israel went i think about it is a nation of war, its all they have known, created by a terrorist war and expanded by continuing wars and conflict, 60 years of conflict must do something negative to the national physic :dunno: and then combine that with rampant right wing religious fanaticism.

Nothing good can come from this.

 

[DeepState]

1. First, Israel was not fighting in the Coalition of the Willing.
Only the US, UK, Aus, Poland send troops - so Israel never "fought" that war.

It provide supports then, that's also fighting... since the list was never known, according the a free source wikipedia... we might never know if Israel was indeed in that coalition.

The main reason is not that Israel don't want to join, but that if they do, no other Arab state will join the coalition.

----


2. Apparently it's just personal attacks with you... I think I have given enough time to your nonsense.


3. Would you send your kids to fight our wars? I bet you would not.


4. Does enjoying the liberty and freedom, courtesy of "our" oppression by "our" soldiers while ignoring the suffering of another people and philosophically tells them it's reality, it's life and I can't say a thing because that would be hypocritical.


5. Does that make you a better person?


6. Let say I'm what you said I am - a hypocrite... What does it make you a person who apparently have no financial worries, who retired young, who were blessed with good fortune... what does it make you who have everything and sit there and shrug at the suffering of others with comments like "that's life, grow up".


7. I'd rather be a hypocrite any day over what you are.


8. Was I around when the genocide, the wars, the deaths etc. etc. since the beginning of time to before my birth to do anything about it?


9. So I ought to go tell Australia and all other bad countries to undo their genocide and give up or destroy all the advances and wealth because if I am OK with them enjoying it, if I dare enjoy it too, I am a hypocrite?


10. Does it ever occur to you that maybe, maybe, in the real world you're standing in, in a world where time cannot be turned back and actions undone... does it occur to you that to have learn of injustice committed, wrongs done... that maybe I am against such crimes because of the very fact that I am speaking up against it?


11. That even if I don't speak up against all crimes committed by all states on all people then and now, the fact that I speak up against one, lend my voice to one and calling for peace and justice... maybe that is better, more useful, more just.... hypocritical as it might appear... but more learned than sitting around and just say that's the way of the world, the might will be right, the might get mightier by destroying the weak... that's in our history, that's to be our future.


12. Who's the appeaser?

1. Israel was unofficial in its participation with the Coalition of the Willing. It could not be officially named for a range of reasons, not least of which was the need to secure other Arab states into the Coalition for legitimacy. Semantics aside, Patriot missile batteries were stored on Israeli soil together with other supplies relevant to the military action. Israel also supplied advisors, interrogators and weapons systems. (source: Sourcewatch and Stanford)

2. I do not know you. I find your ideas outrageous and offensive. So I engage. You might find that whilst personal attacks do happen, they are uncommon and relate to a very small number of posters whose views are disputed or unsupported by the great majority of thoughtful posters or otherwise determine that my work is “rubbish” or “fluff” but would not last 30 seconds in a definitive situation. For the great majority, it’s all very nice.

3. Of course not. Although my father was a Captain before moving back to civilian life and my Uncle a Colonel during his career in the armed forces, I do not want my children to follow in those footsteps. As so common, this is to be beside the point. This exchange has nothing to do with sending our children to war at all.



4. It is not hypocritical to say you enjoy freedoms at the expense of others. That is power. It is hypocritical to say that it’s all fine to oppress others if it benefits you, but to call another nation or group as a moral outrage when they engage in similar behaviour although the specific circumstances must naturally differ in detail. Your disgust at being roped in as part of a wider justification is entirely naïve and forgets that the protections offered to you call upon the same strategies, although the details will be different necessarily.

Your verbosity in condemning Israel as an oppressor and highlighting the suffering of the oppressed (you don’t care whether they are Palestinian or not) over and over shows that you did not see this hypocrisy as you berated others. I found this offensive.

It appears that you are willing to countenance the hypocrisy. That is a big move forward and a main plank of my argument. No-one claims the moral ground here. You original position was very hypocritical.

Now to progress, which is moving beyond the scope of my intent.


5. It makes you/me a more internally consistent and less hypocritical person. I cannot tell if that makes you/me better.

6. You make a lot of assumptions. You have no idea what I do or how I have examined this. It is a privilege to be able to give back in the way that I do. Oh, by the way, I care about this stuff enough to obtain post-graduate qualifications in Political Science. I studied military strategy including nuclear weapons strategy (HD). I also studied Conflict Resolution (HD) amongst other things like theories of International Relations and schools of thought like Neo-Realism. We did not watch one YouTube video. We examined the world and we read the original thoughts. I paid $35k for this and dedicated a stack of time to it so I can make better choices. And then, I come across you. Who thinks I sit on a banana lounge all day sipping daiquiris.



7. Good, let’s keep it that way. If you were me, it might imply that I would need to be you. That’s a horrible thought.

8. Did the world’s history only begin when you were born? Were the enmities that lead to conflict 50 years later reset when you emerged?

9. If you do this, and regard Australia as no better or worse than others engaging in conflict, then you are not a hypocrite to my mind. You are being consistent in your position.

10. I am also against such crimes. I did not say that it was wrong to say so in general. I said it was hypocritical to throw bile at others who are engaging in the activities of your protectors. That is the crux of the hypocrisy I wanted/needed to bring to light. No-one gets to claim the moral high ground.

11. It might surprise you to learn that realism and neo-realism does not condemn us to an ever worsening pattern of destruction and warfare. It just says nations will compete to improve their position. The degree of inter-state violence is actually decreasing, as if to make this point clear. The efforts to prevent war and provide release mechanisms are growing each year.

12. You remain so unless you have changed your position on Bali and Indonesia.

 

[luutzu]

RY's investment approach as applied to "managing" Israel's Gaza "Protective Edge":

RY-Consulting: You want no more rockets into Israel?
General: Yes sir. No rockets.
RY-Consulting: Rockets came from Gaza, let's bomb it.
General: Good idea sir, but where do we bomb?
RY-Consulting: Everywhere, of course. That will minimise the risk of us ever missing anything.

General: Reasonable, fair... But wouldn't that also kill a lot of people?

RY, log in to a bunch of databases, come up with tables, data and charts then...

RY-Consulting: According to my Bloomberg, no rockets has ever been fired from a desert. No rockets can be fired from a people without food, shelter or water... You want to minimise risk of rocket fires? Make Gaza a desert and make its people homeless and hungry... anything less is too risky and I won't feel good about taking your money for that kind of advice.

---

I read, from Buffett's own words, and in his interviews... that he don't write a book on investment because everything he could possibly write about has been written by Graham.

I also read that Buffett said he's 85% Graham, 15% Fisher... that's 100% to me.

So either he's lying or doesn't know what he's doing from just reading those two books. I'd take the word of a man who came from relatively nothing and made billions for himself and countless others into millionaires....

I'd take his words over a bunch of literate, well read idiots with databases and fancy maths who does nothing for their pay but aim head in the direction of the herd, regarless of direction.

 

[luutzu]

1. Israel was unofficial in its participation with the Coalition of the Willing. It could not be officially named for a range of reasons, not least of which was the need to secure other Arab states into the Coalition for legitimacy. Semantics aside, Patriot missile batteries were stored on Israeli soil together with other supplies relevant to the military action. Israel also supplied advisors, interrogators and weapons systems. (source: Sourcewatch and Stanford)

2. I do not know you. I find your ideas outrageous and offensive. So I engage. You might find that whilst personal attacks do happen, they are uncommon and relate to a very small number of posters whose views are disputed or unsupported by the great majority of thoughtful posters or otherwise determine that my work is “rubbish” or “fluff” but would not last 30 seconds in a definitive situation. For the great majority, it’s all very nice.

3. Of course not. Although my father was a Captain before moving back to civilian life and my Uncle a Colonel during his career in the armed forces, I do not want my children to follow in those footsteps. As so common, this is to be beside the point. This exchange has nothing to do with sending our children to war at all.



4. It is not hypocritical to say you enjoy freedoms at the expense of others. That is power. It is hypocritical to say that it’s all fine to oppress others if it benefits you, but to call another nation or group as a moral outrage when they engage in similar behaviour although the specific circumstances must naturally differ in detail. Your disgust at being roped in as part of a wider justification is entirely naïve and forgets that the protections offered to you call upon the same strategies, although the details will be different necessarily.

Your verbosity in condemning Israel as an oppressor and highlighting the suffering of the oppressed (you don’t care whether they are Palestinian or not) over and over shows that you did not see this hypocrisy as you berated others. I found this offensive.

It appears that you are willing to countenance the hypocrisy. That is a big move forward and a main plank of my argument. No-one claims the moral ground here. You original position was very hypocritical.

Now to progress, which is moving beyond the scope of my intent.


5. It makes you/me a more internally consistent and less hypocritical person. I cannot tell if that makes you/me better.

6. You make a lot of assumptions. You have no idea what I do or how I have examined this. It is a privilege to be able to give back in the way that I do. Oh, by the way, I care about this stuff enough to obtain post-graduate qualifications in Political Science. I studied military strategy including nuclear weapons strategy (HD). I also studied Conflict Resolution (HD) amongst other things like theories of International Relations and schools of thought like Neo-Realism. We did not watch one YouTube video. We examined the world and we read the original thoughts. I paid $35k for this and dedicated a stack of time to it so I can make better choices. And then, I come across you. Who thinks I sit on a banana lounge all day sipping daiquiris.



7. Good, let’s keep it that way. If you were me, it might imply that I would need to be you. That’s a horrible thought.

8. Did the world’s history only begin when you were born? Were the enmities that lead to conflict 50 years later reset when you emerged?

9. If you do this, and regard Australia as no better or worse than others engaging in conflict, then you are not a hypocrite to my mind. You are being consistent in your position.

10. I am also against such crimes. I did not say that it was wrong to say so in general. I said it was hypocritical to throw bile at others who are engaging in the activities of your protectors. That is the crux of the hypocrisy I wanted/needed to bring to light. No-one gets to claim the moral high ground.

11. It might surprise you to learn that realism and neo-realism does not condemn us to an ever worsening pattern of destruction and warfare. It just says nations will compete to improve their position. The degree of inter-state violence is actually decreasing, as if to make this point clear. The efforts to prevent war and provide release mechanisms are growing each year.

12. You remain so unless you have changed your position on Bali and Indonesia.

There are two main arguments I put forth:

1. Israel has no moral ground, no legal or legitimate reason for its war on the Palestinians;

2. If Israel is doing it for its national interests - and all wars are based on deception etc. I'm fine with that - that's the way of the world. Just keep me out of this self-interest, amoral world, realist's approach to war. For to claim self-interest, where is my self interest in this war on Gaza? None...

Yea, cry me a river about my disgusting behaviour...

Some 1600 people have died, some 6000 injured, at least half the population made homeless... and all this from a made up pretext of self defense, from using the murder of 3 youths to pick a fight to break up potential peace talks...

That and what I say horrifies you? It outraged you?

Fair and balance right there. A good sense of good and evil.

 

[luutzu]

Here's the words from a man who probably doesn't get his information second hand or from youtube; who devote most of his life examining just about every war and conflicts and human rights issues on the planet...

I am pretty sure you can't call him a hypocrite either...

See what he have to say about this conflict:

 

[luutzu]

6. You make a lot of assumptions. You have no idea what I do or how I have examined this. It is a privilege to be able to give back in the way that I do. Oh, by the way, I care about this stuff enough to obtain post-graduate qualifications in Political Science. I studied military strategy including nuclear weapons strategy (HD). I also studied Conflict Resolution (HD) amongst other things like theories of International Relations and schools of thought like Neo-Realism. We did not watch one YouTube video. We examined the world and we read the original thoughts. I paid $35k for this and dedicated a stack of time to it so I can make better choices. And then, I come across you. Who thinks I sit on a banana lounge all day sipping daiquiris.

Might want to get a refund.

I probably watch more lectures on this issue than all the lectures your 35K degree get you.
Does the free lectures, even though given by professors at Harvard and "proper" universities... does free lectures on youtube make it less qualified?

I don't know why a world-renown thinker, and yes, a lecturer on courses like ones you paid... someone like Chomsky said the solution to this Israeli-Palestinian conflict is quite simple: Israel just agree to peace talks and take 80% of historic Palestine and give the Palestinians the other 20% - as the UN, then slowly Palestinian leaderships then and now, has all agreed is legal and "fair".

That while he don't know what the solution is to conflicts like Libya etc., this one is quite simple. The same sentiments are expressed by just about every other scholars on the subject.

But of course it's not that simple... I'm just a kid without a degree so what do i know. Oh wait, I simply summarise what the guys that probably wrote the books that the person who gave you a HD recommend as your readings... these guys just aren't sophisticated enough.

 

[luutzu]

Chamberlain in 1935/6 is just totally irrelevant to the conflict in question, ok so perhaps not totally irrelevant due to the fact that Chamberlain and the western Europeans in general in the 1930's had had enough of war...a thousand years of war and they had finally had enough.

40 years of winning wars and the Israeli appetite for war is still very strong...Israel went i think about it is a nation of war, its all they have known, created by a terrorist war and expanded by continuing wars and conflict, 60 years of conflict must do something negative to the national physic :dunno: and then combine that with rampant right wing religious fanaticism.

Nothing good can come from this.

Like most people, I never really question what does it mean to want to be a "Jewish State". I just take it at face value that Israel is democratic, has elections, many writers, directors, scholars, thinkers etc. etc. that I admire are of Jewish ancestry so its claim to be a liberal democratic country sharing values like those of the US, the UK, Australia... that it's just like Australia - except instead of a majority Christian/Anglo population, Israel's is Jewish.

When i saw a lecture where Mearsheimer said that Israel doesn't share American values, Chomsky said Israel is a racist state without even flinching... I youtube a few on the street interviews with Jewish Israelis, look up a few news on some laws and protests in Israel...

I am not saying that this is conclusive or representative, but if we ask what does it mean to make Israel a Jewish state... the answer is the same principles and laws that were made to keep Australia White; American White and Colored apart...

Worst is that since there are only some 5 million Jewish Israelis and some 1 million or so Arab Israelis.. to keep Israel Jewish will have to mean policies that discriminate immigration into Israel by non Jewish people, policies to bring more Jews in and keep the non Jewish Arabs inside Israel less powerful and less influential - and the obvious way you do that is make policies that give them menial jobs, little money...

So theoretically, the consequences of a Jewish state divides the country from within, and its policies to those "outside" its borders is Gaza and the West Bank.

Can Israel keep doing what it has been doing? It is betting that it could.

 

[burglar]

... Who thinks I sit on a banana lounge all day sipping daiquiris ...

If I may be so rude ... (I love interjecting)

What are you sipping while you sit on a banana lounge all day?

 

[DeepState]

Here's the words from a man who probably doesn't get his information second hand or from youtube; who devote most of his life examining just about every war and conflicts and human rights issues on the planet...

I am pretty sure you can't call him a hypocrite either...

See what he have to say about this conflict:

Thanks for this.

Chomsky is a towering intellect in linguistics and global politics. His words were very measured and, to my understanding, an accurate portrayal of the truth as he perceives it.

In this clip, he says:

1. Israel is extending its territory not due to security reasons but due to its ability to project power.

2. President Bush received advice from his security apparatus that invading Iraq would increase the risk of terrorism against the US. He invaded anyway, not due to concern for US security, but for power projection and seizure of assets.


Chomsky compares the two and is highlighting their commonality with respect to the use of power projection under the cover of security concerns to expand their domain. He is not being hypocritical. He equates one with the other without elevating one over the other in any way.

In contrast, your position has clearly been to assert that Israel's position has morally debased you for using propaganda in an effort to secure legitimacy whilst waging war. At the same time, you regard efforts which Chomsky himself argues is a power grab conducted by another nations including Australia as entirely valid if it improves the lot of yourself and children. That position is nothing if not hypocritical.

If this is not apparent to you, it is likely apparent to many others. You are welcome to your perspective and to defend it. In my opinion, the perspective is hypocritical. You have provided yet more basis for this position.

In case it is not clear, my position is that war is disgusting and to be avoided if at all possible. Nonetheless it occurs for all sorts of reasons. It occurs for reasons that offends our sensitivities. Accepting that realism or neo-realism has a perspective that somewhat describes world events does not even vaguely imply the broader set of beliefs that I have, nor describes the reasons I came to those conclusions. It just happens to describe what is going on here. No viewpoint in political science fits all circumstances all the time. We are not condemned to fight large scale war. Realism makes no such prediction. Mearsheimer's own deliberations on nuclear strategy are a tribute to this argument. Be very careful to infer that I am an appeaser. I have made no such claim. Only you have.

I claim that there is no basis to regard the actions of the US and the coalition of the willing (including Australia) in relation to Iraq as less morally objectionable than that which Israel or, for that matter, Hamas is presently engaging in. No-one gets to claim the moral high ground.

Although no-one gets to claim the moral high ground, the belief that most people would think that, in World War II, the only people that suffered were the Jews and that's about it is morally reprehensible and deserves complete condemnation. I can only wonder if you are naïve or despicable. I hope it is the former.

 

[DeepState]

If I may be so rude ... (I love interjecting)

What are you sipping while you sit on a banana lounge all day?

:topic

But since we're at it.

Well, I have a 50 meter indoor pool heated to tropical temperatures, complete with wave machine. I entirely eschew banana lounges. That's so white shoe brigade. I have had delivered from Italy a cut down version of the yacht that Jordon Belfort had, the Nadine. I sit on that and am partial to Margaritas ingested via the body shot method.

When are you coming around?

:alcohol:

 

[burglar]

... When are you coming around?

:alcohol:

You see the two buddies drinking ...
(I am assuming for now, that we are buddies)
I would be the one on the right.

 

[luutzu]

Thanks for this.

Chomsky is a towering intellect in linguistics and global politics. His words were very measured and, to my understanding, an accurate portrayal of the truth as he perceives it.

In this clip, he says:

1. Israel is extending its territory not due to security reasons but due to its ability to project power.

2. President Bush received advice from his security apparatus that invading Iraq would increase the risk of terrorism against the US. He invaded anyway, not due to concern for US security, but for power projection and seizure of assets.


Chomsky compares the two and is highlighting their commonality with respect to the use of power projection under the cover of security concerns to expand their domain. He is not being hypocritical. He equates one with the other without elevating one over the other in any way.

In contrast, your position has clearly been to assert that Israel's position has morally debased you for using propaganda in an effort to secure legitimacy whilst waging war. At the same time, you regard efforts which Chomsky himself argues is a power grab conducted by another nations including Australia as entirely valid if it improves the lot of yourself and children. That position is nothing if not hypocritical.

If this is not apparent to you, it is likely apparent to many others. You are welcome to your perspective and to defend it. In my opinion, the perspective is hypocritical. You have provided yet more basis for this position.

In case it is not clear, my position is that war is disgusting and to be avoided if at all possible. Nonetheless it occurs for all sorts of reasons. It occurs for reasons that offends our sensitivities. Accepting that realism or neo-realism has a perspective that somewhat describes world events does not even vaguely imply the broader set of beliefs that I have, nor describes the reasons I came to those conclusions. It just happens to describe what is going on here. No viewpoint in political science fits all circumstances all the time. We are not condemned to fight large scale war. Realism makes no such prediction. Mearsheimer's own deliberations on nuclear strategy are a tribute to this argument. Be very careful to infer that I am an appeaser. I have made no such claim. Only you have.

I claim that there is no basis to regard the actions of the US and the coalition of the willing (including Australia) in relation to Iraq as less morally objectionable than that which Israel or, for that matter, Hamas is presently engaging in. No-one gets to claim the moral high ground.

Although no-one gets to claim the moral high ground, the belief that most people would think that, in World War II, the only people that suffered were the Jews and that's about it is morally reprehensible and deserves complete condemnation. I can only wonder if you are naïve or despicable. I hope it is the former.

Why are you beating a horse that was long dead before you even beat it?

Didn't I say something like... It is petty of me, the reason is a petty one... petty because what Israel is doing is not to my interest while claiming to do represent my value.

Your entire argument is about me being disgusting and hypocritical when I say that if this is how the war is... I might not have literally wrote that, but it is implied... that yea, I know how the world works, I'll come slowly to see that this is what power does... So in being a realistic person, if a war is to be fought in my name, that if Israel is to claim to the world that my values, as represented in my Country's "western values"... at least make that war of benefit to me and my family, to me and my fellow Australians... so that we could share in the spoil of wars and not just one day, and i dearly hope that day never come, to possibly pay for it.

No free lunch.

That makes me hypocritical? Well, I did say it's petty... and in that post on China, I did quote Mearsheimer that China ought to be the US and practise better hypocrisies.

To my knowledge, except for possibly China, no other country whose people suffered in WW2 constantly use that tragedy as a blank cheque, as a veil, to do as the Israeli is doing.

China uses their "century of humiliation", but not to this extend. I mean, if China were on the same scale as Israel, it would bomb and occupy the entirety of East and South East Asia and claim every critics as Emperor Hirohito (or whatever his name was);


Anyway, I know you have a thing for me. Flattered as I am, this is not about me or you...

Your opinion of Chomsky is too childish.

You seem to think that since he said the US also commit expansionist policies, that we shouldn't be surprise Israel is also doing it... that he say that so he must be indifferent; that he's worldly and see that that's how the world is so suck it up.

I have 3 meals a day brought about by a nation that also committed genocide to make room; I live in a peace brought about by wars... and so unless I denounce and give up all these, it is hypocritical for me to criticise any nation that IS committing these genocide and fighting this war for its interest.

First, as i've said, if that makes me a hypocrite, I am glad to be one;

Second, you seriously think what Israel is doing is to its national interests? Forget about morality as I've said before... national interest, for Israel?

Just about all South American states have withdrawn their diplomats from Israel; No Arabs, the majority of its neighbours, like Israel for the wars its been waging; The Israeli people, its youth, are getting more and more racist and arrogant towards their fellow ethnic, 2nd-, 3rd-, fourth-, fifth-class minorities... its leadership practice systematic theft of other people's property and livelihood... what examples does that set for a nation and its people?

How does it benefit a country that spent most of its blood and treasures on indoctrinating its young with hate, and arm its defense force to occupy and oppress?


Maybe you ought to be grateful to hypocrites like me for being allowed into Australia. I'm assuming here your family weren't of the First Fleet.... it's hypocrites like me, though more intelligent and do rather than just talk like me... it's people like us who stand atop that bloodied mountain and say no, no more racist White Australia policies that benefits me more than people of coloured; no more genocide and displacements of the Aborigines; that we are sorry for the crimes committed by our leaders, by our forefathers but let's talk of peace, let's compromise and give each of us and our children a chance.

 

[Julia]

What are you sipping while you sit on a banana lounge all day?

I believe RY specified a daiquiri. A delicious cocktail with white rum, sugar syrup, egg white and lemon juice shaken over ice.

 

[DeepState]

1. Why are you beating a horse that was long dead before you even beat it?


2. Didn't I say something like... It is petty of me, the reason is a petty one... petty because what Israel is doing is not to my interest while claiming to do represent my value.


3. Your entire argument is about me being disgusting and hypocritical when I say that if this is how the war is... I might not have literally wrote that, but it is implied... that yea, I know how the world works, I'll come slowly to see that this is what power does... So in being a realistic person, if a war is to be fought in my name, that if Israel is to claim to the world that my values, as represented in my Country's "western values"... at least make that war of benefit to me and my family, to me and my fellow Australians... so that we could share in the spoil of wars and not just one day, and i dearly hope that day never come, to possibly pay for it.



4. No free lunch.


5. That makes me hypocritical? Well, I did say it's petty... and in that post on China, I did quote Mearsheimer that China ought to be the US and practise better hypocrisies.


6. To my knowledge, except for possibly China, no other country whose people suffered in WW2 constantly use that tragedy as a blank cheque, as a veil, to do as the Israeli is doing.


7. China uses their "century of humiliation", but not to this extend. I mean, if China were on the same scale as Israel, it would bomb and occupy the entirety of East and South East Asia and claim every critics as Emperor Hirohito (or whatever his name was);


8. Anyway, I know you have a thing for me. Flattered as I am, this is not about me or you...


9. Your opinion of Chomsky is too childish.

You seem to think that since he said the US also commit expansionist policies, that we shouldn't be surprise Israel is also doing it... that he say that so he must be indifferent; that he's worldly and see that that's how the world is so suck it up.


10. I have 3 meals a day brought about by a nation that also committed genocide to make room; I live in a peace brought about by wars... and so unless I denounce and give up all these, it is hypocritical for me to criticise any nation that IS committing these genocide and fighting this war for its interest.

First, as i've said, if that makes me a hypocrite, I am glad to be one;


11. Second, you seriously think what Israel is doing is to its national interests? Forget about morality as I've said before... national interest, for Israel?

Just about all South American states have withdrawn their diplomats from Israel; No Arabs, the majority of its neighbours, like Israel for the wars its been waging; The Israeli people, its youth, are getting more and more racist and arrogant towards their fellow ethnic, 2nd-, 3rd-, fourth-, fifth-class minorities... its leadership practice systematic theft of other people's property and livelihood... what examples does that set for a nation and its people?

How does it benefit a country that spent most of its blood and treasures on indoctrinating its young with hate, and arm its defense force to occupy and oppress?


12. Maybe you ought to be grateful to hypocrites like me for being allowed into Australia. I'm assuming here your family weren't of the First Fleet.... it's hypocrites like me, though more intelligent and do rather than just talk like me... it's people like us who stand atop that bloodied mountain and say no, no more racist White Australia policies that benefits me more than people of coloured; no more genocide and displacements of the Aborigines; that we are sorry for the crimes committed by our leaders, by our forefathers but let's talk of peace, let's compromise and give each of us and our children a chance.

1. Did you put the obituary up somewhere?

2. Yes you did.

Post 144
The other reason I don't like what Israel is doing is petty but I just don't like people killing anyone, let alone civilians and children in their thousands, year in year out... I don't like people who are racist, who systematically cleanse another ethnic group, who continuously occupy their land and destroy what livelihood people managed to rake out from whatever land or material they could managed to gathered over the years since displacement... who brutalise and subjugate fellow human beings... then, then have to nerve to tell me that if i were in their shoes, I would do the same.

And i'm upset, petty as it is, that all these time I was made a sucker and didn't know it.

…which is hardly rescinding the hypocritical statements:

Post #135
I am never excusing that terrorism or violence... and in many ways, I'm happy for myself and my children that the Western powers have to prop up dictators and control to world... because as far as i'm concern, that's good for me and my children.. .and I hope the US and the Western powers continue to dominate and China and Russia and all other powers remain weak lest my kids have to go to war...

…

So Israel can lie and do what they do for their national interests, just don't use my name or lie to me about doing it to project my values and how we're both alike. Why? Because it's morally offensive what they're doing, doing it in my name, I get no benefit from it but might one day have to pay the price for their greed.

It simply adds to the list of reasons to condemn Israel’s actions. You are reinventing history, albeit I have a great deal of sympathy and alignment with what you say in Post 144.


3. You have completely missed my entire argument which is as wide as the side of a barn, which is why this continues. Your ability to read something and understand something else is a special talent whose results are scattered thoughout. Luu, that is not my argument at all. You only seem to think it is.

By the way, being realistic and all, how is Israel actually supposed to engage in a war that it can categorically benefit you and your family? Further, in a world of power which you are becoming more aware of what other context do you think Israel is supposed to conjour in order to provide moral cover for its activities? This is war. Whatever it takes.

4. We finally agree. First time in a while. Take a breather. … Now, let’s continue.


5. Nations know that they are hyprocritical. Propaganda is a lot about trying to distract away from that. Making mention that nations are hypocritical does not mean your position is not hypocritical.


6. Maybe. And so? Countries will create context. MH17 was a regrettable context, for example. What is available to each will be different.


7. And your point would be?


8. No, Luu. I’m not really having a go at you. Really I’m not. This issue is bigger than you. But you are what I have in front of me right now. And the issue is…..yadda yadda


9. Really?

You seem to think that since he said the US also commit expansionist policies, that we shouldn't be surprise Israel is also doing it... that he say that so he must be indifferent; that he's worldly and see that that's how the world is so suck it up.

Firstly, when did you become a psychic? Your calmly worded post regarding my professional efforts suggest that you believe that you have attained some pretty amazing talents in that regard. The detail was quite something in the absence of facts.

You are dead wrong about how I shop for my wife. We no longer buy whole stores. By the time she gets to wear the 200th dress, the thing is out of fashion. Dead wrong, Luu.

Secondly, Chomsky mentioned Israel’s expansionist policies which pre-date Iraq 2. In fact they pre-date Iraq 1. So I didn’t think that, because Chomski made no statement that allows me to represent things in the way you suggest. Each of your assertions do not follow anything I have said/written. They do not represent my beliefs despite your psychic prowess. Perhaps you might like to click the YouTube link again and actually watch it and summarise it….accurately. Particularly if you plan on fabricating material to misconstrue what I actually said. WMD.

Pretty childish error there Luu. Are you going to have yet another hissy fit?


10. Finally. I can rest. Mission is actually accomplished. Thankyou for the admission of hypocrisy in your perspective. Was it so hard to see this a bit earlier to save this extensive exchange? In this land, you are free to be a hypocrite. It’s good that you are happy. Happy is good. Hey dude, guess what, I’m a hypocrite too! Just not on this particular issue. How’s this one…I am appalled by the culling of livestock who I think are sentient beings…but yet I eat meat. Hypocrite. Front and centre.


11. It’s good to dialog without BS. Thanks for the question. I think that Israel and its population have endured a great deal of persecution over a long time. I will not compare this to the suffering of others. I just say that, as a people, they share a common bond and a knowledge that very nasty existential events took place that were designed to destroy them morally and physically. In that position, I as one of these people, would live in the shadow of fear and would arm myself to the teeth to protect everyone I would care for. This creates a great deal of nationalism and a mistrust of outsiders.

I believe that Israel has been expansionist in its objectives…because it can. In that regard, it serves its national interests. It also survived existential wars. They can’t lose a war and survive. So everything they do must be seen in this light.


We can always expect blowback from aggressive posture and action. Instruments of war are often too blunt. Increasingly radicalisation of parts of the Muslim population are being matched. This is plainly dangerous.

Though solutions exist to this dilemma, like the two-state arrangement you have previously outlined, great hurdles remain. Politics is difficult. There are many steps from cup to lip. Right now, the cup pretty much seems to still be sitting on the kitchen bench. There are efforts to broker peace. In blood feuds, the history shows that they go on until one side is pretty much completely annihilated.

This is a serious flash point. This problem just has to be managed along until, sometime, somehow, a peace can be found. The conditions are not present today. I am not optimistic for a solution for many years to come. Meanwhile, seriously deplorable things are going on.


12. I don’t see what you are saying as hypocritical. It is a way of getting objectives that are favourable. Just like war is sometimes used in that manner, compromise and positive action to more progressive policies are too. War is hardly the only way to secure advancement in the national interest or advance humanity. Making peace and mutual forgiveness between sparring partners often serves to further both their interests. Opening trade is too. And so on. Much that goes on to the benefit of humanity requires large scale cooperation across national, ethnic and religious identities.

As I posted earlier, “War is simply the continuation of policy by other means….” …von Clauswitz.

Mostly, policy of the type you describe does not require war. This doesn’t make it inconsistent with achievement by other means.

 

[luutzu]

RY,

Maybe you and others are too wise and too worldly to not take the Israeli-Palestinian crisis with any shock, horror or sadness... maybe one day I too will be that wise, I just hope I will not ever be so wise.

I've answered all your nonsense, you can pick holes and keep doing whatever it is you're doing.. I'm a big enough to know what I've said and where I stand, also big enough to know time shouldn't be wasted on petty nonsense like your pathetic indignation about what you think I said yet wax philosophical lyrics on seeing the horror of war and oppression.

 

[DeepState]

I believe RY specified a daiquiri. A delicious cocktail with white rum, sugar syrup, egg white and lemon juice shaken over ice.

Thank you Julia. I stand corrected and unreservedly apologise for this error in translation. I read one thing and wrote down another. Silly me. I regret any inconvenience this may have caused and will happily shout a round in recompense. More if you are good looking and where I think I am half a chance.