UMEC Forum Index UMEC
United Mining Exploration Commission: A group of friends playing JumpGate-- "a MMORPG that launched smoothly, breaks from fantasy character setting, emphasizes PvP, and is the first persistent world space simulator that nobody talks about." ~Scorch
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

OOT: Israel-Palestine

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    UMEC Forum Index -> Flame War
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
HiTekHick
Test Pilot
Test Pilot


Joined: 25 Oct 2001
Posts: 566
Location: The sticks!

PostPosted: Sat Jun 01, 2002 8:01 am    Post subject: OOT: Israel-Palestine Reply with quote

Whew!!! Dat was fun!!! lol

:Flamer: Grinche doesn't give any kind of research about his gripe with Isreal :Flamer:

Never mind that a game forum is not the place for a RL political debate or chat.

If he really wants someone to pay attention, then he needs a website or books or something for people to look at - as well as post on a more appropriate site. I don't give any credit to anything a person says is truth, and doesn't give you something to research.

I think I succeded in doing what I was attempting - distracting him from his political agenda until a moderator showed up. I never in the world would have imagined that the thread would be locked at one of my best moments (and the bozo still didn't show me anything).

If you skip his posts, and read just mine - I think it is pretty funny... :D But of course, I'm biased. The beginning of the third page (for me), I hit my stride and really start having fun!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MajorFreak
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Jun 01, 2002 9:13 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Israel? hmmm...i don't want to enter the forums just yet (i hate it when i log on and off and lose my "unread" tags)

My opinion of the crisis? Actually, there's a news article i'll post that shows HALF of what i choose to believe (and you can attempt to argue me either way, it doesn't much matter as long as it's convincing. please see my post comments below for the other half of my opinon)
Norman Spector (Times Colonist - Victoria BC, Canada) wrote:
CONFLICT SPRINGS FROM THE FAILURE TO ACCEPT ISRAEL
Since the attacks of Sept.11, the phone has been ringing off the hook. CBC here, Global there. If it's 5 am, it must be the English interview -- 5 pm, the French one. And one must always remember that dressing for television is entirely different from dressing for radio. Or not.
Such is the life of a former ambassador to the Mideast, now that we are at war against (oops, almost said Islamic) terrorists.
Gone are the days when one's gravest decision was whether to pick a fresh mango or grapefruit for breakfast from the orchard outside the bedroom window.
some of the interviews have actually been fun; some debates against those with strongly differing opinions have been challenging.
Then, there was last week's CBC panel with Rick Salutin, who interrupted incessantly and wouldn't let me get a word in edgewise.
Since Salutin is something of a guru for the Canadian Left, here's what i would have said to him:

Rick, you're peeved the Americans accept Israel's latest attacks "as if Ariel Sharon had been right all along." You accuse them of being hypocrites, because nothing changed but their position.
In fact, Sharon erred initally in equating Yasser Arafat and Osama bin Laden. He got closer to the mark when he alleged both Arafat and the Taliban harbour Islamic extremists. It would have been truly hypocritical to continue "slapping him down" and prevent him from fighting against terrorism, as you prefer.
Israel has lost proportionately more than double the number of American civilians killed on Sept.11.
The only difference is that Hamas prefers to blow up kids in restaurants, whereas bin Laden's minions incinerate adults at the office.
You're also disappointed the Americans backed off -- because of "Israel recalcitrance and a barrage of U.S. punditry" -- after it "seemed" they were determined to "resolve festering sores that create recruits...for terror, like the Palestine impasse."

Face it: You got another aspect of the American war wrong. Their pundits figure that most of the Sept.11 terrorists came form oil-rich Saudi Arabia.
They've identified the recalcitrants who truly set back their government's latest peace mission -- Palestinian suicide bombers. They appreciate that a Mideast agreement could easily spur, not deter, Islamic extremists -- Like those who assassinated Egyptian president Anwar Sadat after he recognized Israel (and are now with al-Qaeda).

You, on the other hand, predict that Bush's strategy inevitably will result in "future World Trade Center attacks." There being no facts in the future, I'm less clairvoyant.
However, after the Taliban drubbing, I suspect that terrorists will no longer be welcome in many countries.
As to Gaza, you excuse Arafat because Israel is shutting down travel and bombing police stations. However, I don't think you criticized him in the past for keeping terrorists in jail, or his commitment to extradite them -- your preferred approach to bin Laden.
The first suidide attacks occured in 1994, in the full blush of optimism surrounding the Oslo peace agreement. Then-prime minister Yizhak Rabin sank in the polls, and subsequent bus bombings turfed his successor, the dovish Shimon Peres. Four years later, violence helped defeat Ehud Barak -- the best hope for peace in 50 years.
Through it all, Arafat's intelligence services and 60,000 armed police (called soldiers in Arabic) have looked the other way, when not directly involved. It's obvious you have not met many: their Kalashnikovs are hardly, as you suggest, akin to cellphones.
While the other side is better armed and many more Palestinians have therefore died needlessly, try your simile on bereaved Israeli families. More civilians have been killed since Oslo than in the state's entire history until then.
Happily, neither Sharon nor his predecessors did to Arafat what U.S. President George W. Bush is now doing to Mullah Omar's Taliban regime.

You see no distinction between their "state terror." You say it's as dangerous for Israel and Britain to have nuclear weapons as it would be if Iraqui dictator Shaddam Hussein got his trigger finger on the bomb.
You also mistakenly conflate terrorism and counterterrorism. While "innocents are innocents," some unfortunately die in car accidents. You equate the inevitable accidents of war with the deliberate targetting of non-combatants.
Moreover, clear thinking suggests a moral distinction between Bush's indirect responsibility for Taliban fighters executed by his Northern Alliance proxies, and Arafat's direct dispatch of terrorists to kill school kids in Ma'alot and Olympic athletes in Munish.

Risk, you maintain everyone agrees on a two-state solution to the Mideast conflict. Yet, Arafat's own officials say that if Arafat truly wants a Palestiian state alongside Israel, not in its place, he will have to drop his traditional demand that millions of refugees should have the right to live there.
I have yet to hear Arafat, in English or Arabic, recognize Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. Reading your columns, I sometimes wonder whether you do.
That absent recognition -- not the lesser problems of Ariel Sharon, or post-1967 occupation and settlements -- is the root cause of the Mideast conflict. It has been, bin Laden and Hamas have reminded us rather robustly, for more than 80 years.

Norman Spector served as ambassador to Israel and Canada's first representative to the Palestinian Authority in Gaza

Okay, now then, let's set the record straight. I agree with the above quote, BUT, Mr.Spector left out the other half of the equation: After the nov'67 UNsc resolution 242 "rubber-stamped" a ceasefire, Kissinger rejected an Egyptian peace proposal by Saddat (in feb'71) that DID recognize the state of Israel which, in turn, caused the '73 war...long and short of it is that both sides refuse to recognize the existance of the other in the sense of a "state", and will kill/ignore/dismiss/veto anyone who compromises...up to and including the world court and the UN and it's security council. ('65-'90) Course, after the gulf war it all became moot...leading to the "rational" Oslo agreements.
    What's amazing is the way corporate interests prefer to use double speak when talking about supplying equipment to oppressive regimes while being subsidized by tax money...as long as those regimes contributed to the accessability of cheap strategic resources.


Last edited by MajorFreak on Tue Feb 11, 2003 8:25 am; edited 7 times in total
Back to top
MadCat
President
President


Joined: 24 Sep 2001
Posts: 501

PostPosted: Sat Jun 01, 2002 7:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

lol now THIS is where that entire thread belongs in the first place wink
_________________
MadCat
UMEC President

"Diplomacy is the art of saying 'nice doggy' till you can find a rock" --bumper sticker

"Server will be a bit, Josh says we're rebooting everything in sight"--GM_Istvan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MajorFreak
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Jun 02, 2002 9:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

re: Tom Friedman

That guy is the worst corporate stooge i've ever seen. his Pulitzer prize for journalism is a farce and a half. the dude is a total spindoctor...one wonders who the judges for the pulitzer are, eh?

Highlights of his scintillating POV:
  1. The factions are polarized! (Muffy: but nary a peep about the fact neither one acknowledges the existence of the other; intent most likely to tacitly imply that the palestines don't have any right to exist as a state)
  2. The Tease part1: Peace envoys might pull a rabbit out of their hat
  3. The Tease part2: Israel really wants to pull out it's civilians
  4. The Tease part3: Arafat has no vision for peace and is totally corrupt
  5. The Tease denouement: The Israelis are caretakers
  6. The Tease alternative: A "new" mandate using outside force, as well.
  7. The Tease salesperson: A trusted third party.
  8. The Tease mantra: "The Devil is in the Details" (Muffy: nah, it's the lies of statistics)
The Whine wrote:
We always had a short leash

Hyperlink to this post


Last edited by MajorFreak on Tue Feb 11, 2003 8:26 am; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
MajorFreak
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Jun 03, 2002 6:14 pm    Post subject: haha...that was a funn33 thread Reply with quote

hmmm...well, just read it. (actually in the process of, atm) That human rights group is kosher for sure, but it all comes down to statistics.
Quote:
One death is a tragedy. One million is a statistic.
~Stalin

Twain's words were:
"Figures often beguile me, particularly when I have the arranging of them myself; in which case the remark attributed to Disraeli would often apply with justice and force: 'There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies and statistics.' "
~Autobiography of Mark Twain
The fact that Israel has the backing of USA is hardly in question. US basically considers Israel to be a useful thorn in the side of OPEC. *shrug* The dudes basically reinventing the wheel. anyone who's ever researched the subject accepts the basic fact that Israel is doing to palestines what South Africa did with the black - Apartheid. *shrug* Not to mention the USS Liberty thing...

The dude posted flame bait, not an opinion. Opinions are okay...he could have gone into the reasoning behind the cantonments and the Liberty attack, but noooooooooooo he had to hide behind statistics since he's got no opinions. what a bore.
    Muffy guesses:
  • cantonment system = machiavellian colonization of subject country 101. duh (the fact that he misses the point that this "civil rights" group advocates a "liberal" and "humanist" series of actions that mirrors Apartheid.)
  • USS Liberty (a communications intelligence ship) attack = uhhh..after studying the facts it wasn't supposed to be a frame up, but an attempt to gain the Golan heights "without the knowledge" of President Johnson...you'll note this attack came during the June'76 war. (ie. plausible deniability - Soviet russia was very close to war over this; But, jeez, talk about red herring...arguing about THAT is the height of conceit. talk is cheap)
omg. i just got to the
fag wrote:
I've decided enough is enough. And speak my mind at work at play and at home.
lol! speak your mind? what? regurgitating facts with no opinion = speaking one's mind? wow! spam alert! (this guy probably chain letters ICQ warnings about having to pay for ICQ...remember those? gods)

LOL!! "EAT YOUR FOOD! THERE'S MILLIONS OF ETHIOPIANS STARVING TO DEATH! NOW EAT YOUR BROCCOLI!" (yeah, okay, so i'm not allowed to party after work, but am supposed to cry my eyes out in a dark corner instead?)
    let me reiterate. he never once went into detail about his opinion OF what he cut & pasted...very poor form. All i learned from that was what a freakin boring ass that guy was.

    I mean, he didn't speak about how hard it is to get this information in the corporate media world and what not; Nor how this sort of info is taboo/marginalized...Nor how this reminds everyone of the introduction to Animal Farm (and how most publications of that book removed it - 'literary censorship in england')
Noam Chomsky wrote:
"well educated people understand that is the position you must assume."
In the final analysis, GM_Savant has redeemed himself yet again...Grinche was marginalizing the subject he was attempting to shoot himself in the foot with.

Last edited by MajorFreak on Wed Jun 05, 2002 2:30 pm; edited 6 times in total
Back to top
MajorFreak
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jun 05, 2002 1:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Noam Chomsky wrote:
In many ways, american society is indeed open, and liberal values are preserved

However as poor people and black people and other ethnic minorities know very well, the liberal vaneer is pretty thin.
Mark Twain wrote:
It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: Freedom of speech, Freedom of conscience and the prudence never to practice either of them.
Those that lack the prudence may well pay the cost...now this is obviously no conspiracy. i think it's simply implicit in the system of corporate [welfare]
Back to top
MajorFreak
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2002 4:00 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Gwynne Dyer
Anyone know of mr.Dyer? He's a sort of peace activist/military analyst that has a decent sense of humor about all this cynicism...check out how he describes Sharon's motivations. :Read:
Back to top
HiTekHick
Test Pilot
Test Pilot


Joined: 25 Oct 2001
Posts: 566
Location: The sticks!

PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2002 4:38 am    Post subject: Re: haha...that was a funn33 thread Reply with quote

MajorFreak wrote:
I mean, he didn't speak about how hard it is to get this information in the corporate media world and what not; Nor how this sort of info is taboo/marginalized...Nor how this reminds everyone of the introduction to Animal Farm (and how most publications of that book removed it - 'literary censorship in england'... In the final analysis, GM_Savant has redeemed himself yet again...Grinche was marginalizing the subject he was attempting to shoot himself in the foot with.[/color]
*sniff* And no comments on my having fun... *sniff cry
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
MajorFreak
Guest





PostPosted: Wed Jun 19, 2002 5:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

:Flamer:

Crossreference
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    UMEC Forum Index -> Flame War All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Space Pilot 3K template by Jakob Persson.
Powered by phpBB © 2001 phpBB Group