Conquer Club

Stopper wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Paulicus wrote:As for taking care of terrorists it is the job of the US or UN.

That's a load of crap. Israel is the one of the only countries I know of with the balls to take care of itself WITHOUT the divine "ok" from the UN. Once terrorists start attacking you, it BECOMES your job to "take care of it". I think we as the US have far overextended ourselves as the world police, and I for one am grateful that Israel has the power and the guts to take care of the issue on its own.

On its own? Who are you kidding? The amount of aid the USA gives to Israel runs into tens of billions of dollars a year?! I'm not entirely anti-Israel, it definitely has a right to exist within its 1967 borders, but suggesting it has EVER done anything on its own is just factually wrong - it simply could not support the military it has without US funding.

I stand corrected. Perhaps a more accurate means of saying it would be without worldwide approval.

Well, yes, I didn't say that just to be pedantic - it's important. Israel does what it does without world approval because the US hasn't bothered with world approval in recent years, and look where that has got you (and the rest of us.) It's bizarre just how much some Americans go on about the UN as if it had any significant influence over what America does...Thank God (so to speak) for the midterms...

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Paulicus wrote:As for taking care of terrorists it is the job of the US or UN.

That's a load of crap. Israel is the one of the only countries I know of with the balls to take care of itself WITHOUT the divine "ok" from the UN. Once terrorists start attacking you, it BECOMES your job to "take care of it". I think we as the US have far overextended ourselves as the world police, and I for one am grateful that Israel has the power and the guts to take care of the issue on its own.

Ok I will clarify as well, taking care of terrorist should be done under UN direction as to not make an attack against a terrorist group within a country an attack against that country. What Israel did was kind of like a police officer wounding the hostage and the kidnapper just to free the hostage, don't see that on TV ofter now do we??

Paulicus wrote: Ok I will clarify as well, taking care of terrorist should be done under UN direction as to not make an attack against a terrorist group within a country an attack against that country. What Israel did was kind of like a police officer wounding the hostage and the kidnapper just to free the hostage, don't see that on TV ofter now do we??

Whenever Speed is on, we certainly do.

Paulicus wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Paulicus wrote:As for taking care of terrorists it is the job of the US or UN.

That's a load of crap. Israel is the one of the only countries I know of with the balls to take care of itself WITHOUT the divine "ok" from the UN. Once terrorists start attacking you, it BECOMES your job to "take care of it". I think we as the US have far overextended ourselves as the world police, and I for one am grateful that Israel has the power and the guts to take care of the issue on its own.

Talking of terrorism...I could be wrong but there was no such thing as terrorism in, or emanating from the Middle East prior to the establishment of Israel...in fact the ones using terror tactics were the zionist fighters against British troops in Palestine

Israel does have the right to exist within its original borders and the right to defend itself but it should also abide by all UN resolutions and simply have a bit of heart when dealing with innocent Palestinians

I would have expected a people who have had such a history of suffering would have learnt a bit of compassion

Mirak wrote:

Paulicus wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Paulicus wrote:As for taking care of terrorists it is the job of the US or UN.

That's a load of crap. Israel is the one of the only countries I know of with the balls to take care of itself WITHOUT the divine "ok" from the UN. Once terrorists start attacking you, it BECOMES your job to "take care of it". I think we as the US have far overextended ourselves as the world police, and I for one am grateful that Israel has the power and the guts to take care of the issue on its own.

Talking of terrorism...I could be wrong but there was no such thing as terrorism in, or emanating from the Middle East prior to the establishment of Israel...in fact the ones using terror tactics were the zionist fighters against British troops in Palestine

Israel does have the right to exist within its original borders and the right to defend itself but it should also abide by all UN resolutions and simply have a bit of heart when dealing with innocent Palestinians

I would have expected a people who have had such a history of suffering would have learnt a bit of compassion

Welcome to the world of anti-semitism! That post was saturated with anti-Jew sentament.

there was no such thing as terrorism in, or emanating from the Middle East prior to the establishment of Israel

Israel does have the right to exist within its original borders and the right to defend itself but it should also abide by all UN resolutions and simply have a bit of heart when dealing with INNOCENT Palestinians

As if there are no innocent Jews being killed while boarding a bus that explodes.

I would have expected a people who have had such a history of suffering would have learnt a bit of compassion

And I would expect a little more compassion being SHOWN to a people with such a history of suffering.

The arabs are semites too.

Just to throw it out there:

Being anti-Isreal isn't anti semitism.

The way the palestinians are treated by Isreal is deplorable and brings shame to jews. Plenty of jews are anti-Isreal.

jay_a2j wrote:

Mirak wrote:Israel does have the right to exist within its original borders and the right to defend itself but it should also abide by all UN resolutions and simply have a bit of heart when dealing with innocent Palestinians

I would have expected a people who have had such a history of suffering would have learnt a bit of compassion

Welcome to the world of anti-semitism! That post was saturated with anti-Jew sentament.

I detect anti-extreme-Zionism in the post, but not anti-Semitism. There are plenty of Jews who don't like the way Israel behaves these days.

qeee1 wrote:Just to throw it out there:

Being anti-Isreal isn't anti semitism.

Yeah I'd agree up to a point, but you should be clear what you mean by "anti-Israel". Some people, after all, would like to see Israel disappear completely, but I'm assuming that's not what you meant.

Paulicus wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Paulicus wrote:As for taking care of terrorists it is the job of the US or UN.

That's a load of crap. Israel is the one of the only countries I know of with the balls to take care of itself WITHOUT the divine "ok" from the UN. Once terrorists start attacking you, it BECOMES your job to "take care of it". I think we as the US have far overextended ourselves as the world police, and I for one am grateful that Israel has the power and the guts to take care of the issue on its own.

Ok I will clarify as well, taking care of terrorist should be done under UN direction as to not make an attack against a terrorist group within a country an attack against that country. What Israel did was kind of like a police officer wounding the hostage and the kidnapper just to free the hostage, don't see that on TV ofter now do we??

That's also not entirely true. Hezbollah participates in government in Lebanon, and holds a sizeable amoung of seats in the Lebanese parliament. Furthermore, it has political alliances with several other parties within Lebanon, and this alliance has referred to itself as the "Resistance and Development Bloc". That's not a small amount of influence in the government, from a TERRORIST GROUP whose STATED GOALS are (among other things) to eradicate Israel from the face of the earth.

So your hostage analogy doesn't work. In reality, the hostage and the kidnapper are on VERY friendly terms, and the cop knows that quite well, even if everyone else doesn't. But the cop knows what he's doing, and that the hostage and the kidnapper are pretty tight, so he whacks the kidnapper and wounds the hostage, who was actually one of the kidnapper's accomplices. A pity no one else knew, so now the cop takes a bunch of heat for doing the right thing.

OnlyAmbrose wrote:So your hostage analogy doesn't work. In reality, the hostage and the kidnapper are on VERY friendly terms, and the cop knows that quite well, even if everyone else doesn't. But the cop knows what he's doing, and that the hostage and the kidnapper are pretty tight, so he whacks the kidnapper and wounds the hostage, who was actually one of the kidnapper's accomplices. A pity no one else knew, so now the cop takes a bunch of heat for doing the right thing.

To take the "analogy" even further, the copper didn't use a gun to whack the kidnapper, he used a bloody massive tank, wounding the hostage, and several other perfectly innocent people in the vicinity - while completely missing the kidnapper himself.

Stopper wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:So your hostage analogy doesn't work. In reality, the hostage and the kidnapper are on VERY friendly terms, and the cop knows that quite well, even if everyone else doesn't. But the cop knows what he's doing, and that the hostage and the kidnapper are pretty tight, so he whacks the kidnapper and wounds the hostage, who was actually one of the kidnapper's accomplices. A pity no one else knew, so now the cop takes a bunch of heat for doing the right thing.

To take the "analogy" even further, the copper didn't use a gun to whack the kidnapper, he used a bloody massive tank, wounding the hostage, and several other perfectly innocent people in the vicinity - while completely missing the kidnapper himself.

I second that, and with a new analogy, it's like using a longsword to do surgury instead of a scalpel.

Paulicus wrote:

Stopper wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:So your hostage analogy doesn't work. In reality, the hostage and the kidnapper are on VERY friendly terms, and the cop knows that quite well, even if everyone else doesn't. But the cop knows what he's doing, and that the hostage and the kidnapper are pretty tight, so he whacks the kidnapper and wounds the hostage, who was actually one of the kidnapper's accomplices. A pity no one else knew, so now the cop takes a bunch of heat for doing the right thing.

To take the "analogy" even further, the copper didn't use a gun to whack the kidnapper, he used a bloody massive tank, wounding the hostage, and several other perfectly innocent people in the vicinity - while completely missing the kidnapper himself.

I second that, and with a new analogy, it's like using a longsword to do surgury instead of a scalpel.

So the patient is democracy?

Paulicus wrote:

Stopper wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:So your hostage analogy doesn't work. In reality, the hostage and the kidnapper are on VERY friendly terms, and the cop knows that quite well, even if everyone else doesn't. But the cop knows what he's doing, and that the hostage and the kidnapper are pretty tight, so he whacks the kidnapper and wounds the hostage, who was actually one of the kidnapper's accomplices. A pity no one else knew, so now the cop takes a bunch of heat for doing the right thing.

To take the "analogy" even further, the copper didn't use a gun to whack the kidnapper, he used a bloody massive tank, wounding the hostage, and several other perfectly innocent people in the vicinity - while completely missing the kidnapper himself.

I second that, and with a new analogy, it's like using a longsword to do surgury instead of a scalpel.

When about a third of the patient consists of tumor tissue? I'd say a longsword was necessary. Using a scalpel wouldn't be worth your time.

jay_a2j wrote:

Mirak wrote:

Paulicus wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

Paulicus wrote:As for taking care of terrorists it is the job of the US or UN.

That's a load of crap. Israel is the one of the only countries I know of with the balls to take care of itself WITHOUT the divine "ok" from the UN. Once terrorists start attacking you, it BECOMES your job to "take care of it". I think we as the US have far overextended ourselves as the world police, and I for one am grateful that Israel has the power and the guts to take care of the issue on its own.

Talking of terrorism...I could be wrong but there was no such thing as terrorism in, or emanating from the Middle East prior to the establishment of Israel...in fact the ones using terror tactics were the zionist fighters against British troops in Palestine

Israel does have the right to exist within its original borders and the right to defend itself but it should also abide by all UN resolutions and simply have a bit of heart when dealing with innocent Palestinians

I would have expected a people who have had such a history of suffering would have learnt a bit of compassion

Welcome to the world of anti-semitism! That post was saturated with anti-Jew sentament.

there was no such thing as terrorism in, or emanating from the Middle East prior to the establishment of Israel

Israel does have the right to exist within its original borders and the right to defend itself but it should also abide by all UN resolutions and simply have a bit of heart when dealing with INNOCENT Palestinians

As if there are no innocent Jews being killed while boarding a bus that explodes.

I would have expected a people who have had such a history of suffering would have learnt a bit of compassion

And I would expect a little more compassion being SHOWN to a people with such a history of suffering.

Jay I will respond to this post on a point by point basis, but a bit busy at the moment...

Just for the record the "anti-semite" card has been over used..not agreeing with Israels invasion of Lebanon and arbitrary killings in Gaza does not make me an anti-semite

Your disagreeing with all non-christian beliefs, and by extension cultures and customs does not, presumably, make you a racist

Mirak wrote:
Your disagreeing with all non-christian beliefs, and by extension cultures and customs does not, presumably, make you a racist

Wow! Are you tring to say that "culture and customs" have defined Christians as racists? Let me clear this up. The KKK take on the 'christian' label but make no mistake, the Bible doesn't teach that...we ALL came from a common ansestor (Adam/Eve and Noah/wife).

jay_a2j wrote:

Mirak wrote:
Your disagreeing with all non-christian beliefs, and by extension cultures and customs does not, presumably, make you a racist

Wow! Are you tring to say that "culture and customs" have defined Christians as racists?

Ahh....NO
Please note the use of the word "YOU" and also these two words
"DOES NOT"

Try to argue the point rather than deliberately mis-interpreting what I have said

Mirak wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Mirak wrote:
and by extension cultures and customs does not, presumably, make you a racist

(Pending the results of my self-banishment poll, I can not respond. But would like for you to explain your quote above)

jay_a2j wrote:

Mirak wrote:

jay_a2j wrote:

Mirak wrote:
and by extension cultures and customs does not, presumably, make you a racist

(Pending the results of my self-banishment poll, I can not respond. But would like for you to explain your quote above)

I will explain with pleasure... below is the full quote

"Just for the record the "anti-semite" card has been over used..not agreeing with Israels invasion of Lebanon and arbitrary killings in Gaza does not make me an anti-semite

Your disagreeing with all non-christian beliefs, and by extension cultures and customs does not, presumably, make you a racist"

You may remember that I was responding to your accusation of my being an anti-semite...I was pointing out that that is a cheap shot and that by my being opposed to the actions of the Israellis does not make me an anti- semite.....the same way as you being opposed to non Christian beliefs, and by extention, their customs and culture does not mean that you are a racist.

I hope you understand now and if not, please try reading it very slowly until you do

I am with Israel. Mostly because, hmm....could it have something to do with the fact that they are "God's chosen people"? Also like my pastor likes to point out that every time the US pokes its [our] nose in Israel's business something really bad happens. For example, before/during, oh, Katrina I think it was, we had people over in Israel that told them to give land to somebody (to keep them from attacking ) that is when God choose to send a big messy punishment hurricane. If God still protects His people, I don't think being against them is a very good idea.

Sargent Taylor wrote:I am with Israel. Mostly because, hmm....could it have something to do with the fact that they are "God's chosen people"? Also like my pastor likes to point out that every time the US pokes its [our] nose in Israel's business something really bad happens. For example, before/during, oh, Katrina I think it was, we had people over in Israel that told them to give land to somebody (to keep them from attacking ) that is when God choose to send a big messy punishment hurricane. If God still protects His people, I don't think being against them is a very good idea.

-_-

I can never tell if these people are serious or fucking with me...

Well, I'm with Israel because they have tried to make peace, but they keep getting backhanded (or, in this case, attacked by terrorists) and are faced with one of two options:
1. Sit back and let Hamas and their allies continuously attack them and let them run rampant and worry about what other people say about them being.
or
2. Fight back against the people trying to wipe them out whilst ignoring what others say they should do even though those people don't live in that area (many Israelis are taught Krav Maga for a reason you know).

muy_thaiguy wrote:Well, I'm with Israel because they have tried to make peace, but they keep getting backhanded (or, in this case, attacked by terrorists) and are faced with one of two options:
1. Sit back and let Hamas and their allies continuously attack them and let them run rampant and worry about what other people say about them being.
or
2. Fight back against the people trying to wipe them out whilst ignoring what others say they should do even though those people don't live in that area (many Israelis are taught Krav Maga for a reason you know).

I support the Palestinians for the same reasons.

muy_thaiguy wrote:Well, I'm with Israel because they have tried to make peace, but they keep getting backhanded (or, in this case, attacked by terrorists)

Interesting use of words there, I think the only difference between 'terrorists' and a US/Israeli sanctioned army is a whole lotta money and rhetoric - Suicide bombers are the scourge of society, but daisy cutter bombs dropped from above is 'Liberation In Action' - It also helps if the 'terrorists' in question happen to be of a brown skin colour.

Neither side is innocent in this battle.. but purely for the fact that Israel has the entire US army behind it (for a variety of reasons, one being Fundamentalist Christians trying to fulfil bible prophecy) makes me lean towards the palastinians

Neoteny wrote:

Sargent Taylor wrote:I am with Israel. Mostly because, hmm....could it have something to do with the fact that they are "God's chosen people"? Also like my pastor likes to point out that every time the US pokes its [our] nose in Israel's business something really bad happens. For example, before/during, oh, Katrina I think it was, we had people over in Israel that told them to give land to somebody (to keep them from attacking ) that is when God choose to send a big messy punishment hurricane. If God still protects His people, I don't think being against them is a very good idea.

-_-

I can never tell if these people are serious or fucking with me...

I know exactly what you mean.

Say, Taylor, were you serious or messing with our heads there?