|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on May 18, 2024 20:57:46 GMT
That’s an extremely good question and a very important one . Im going to give you a short answer that might appear crass and incomplete but only because I have purposely made it short and incomplete. I support Israel because I believe it is better for me and mine if Israel wins . My reasoning is similar: How many terrorist acts have been planned, prepared or carried out by Jews in this country? Now compare and contrast with how many have been planned, prepared or carried out by Islamists. Which has demonstrated hostility to the UK public and which is therefore the greatest danger? A question with an obvious answer.
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on May 18, 2024 21:10:24 GMT
That’s an extremely good question and a very important one . Im going to give you a short answer that might appear crass and incomplete but only because I have purposely made it short and incomplete. I support Israel because I believe it is better for me and mine if Israel wins . My reasoning is similar: How many terrorist acts have been planned, prepared or carried out by Jews in this country? Now compare and contrast with how many have been planned, prepared or carried out by Islamists. Which has demonstrated hostility to the UK public and which is therefore the greatest danger? A question with an obvious answer. Indeed.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 18, 2024 21:14:22 GMT
The Palestinians turned down 2 state proposals that didnt give Israel a square inch of the West Bank long before Hamas or Likud came to power. At some point you are going to have to accept some facts. Yes, I know. well for someone who knows you keep denying it. The time has passed for a 2 state solution - it has been rejected so many times now, over so many decades, that neither sides want one. So leave them to it. Eventually, whether by war or peace, they will both come to a situation which they can both live with. An example is Korea - they have officially been at war for 74 years now, and both side scan live with the status quo.
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 19, 2024 0:44:19 GMT
That’s an extremely good question and a very important one . Im going to give you a short answer that might appear crass and incomplete but only because I have purposely made it short and incomplete. I support Israel because I believe it is better for me and mine if Israel wins . My reasoning is similar: How many terrorist acts have been planned, prepared or carried out by Jews in this country? Now compare and contrast with how many have been planned, prepared or carried out by Islamists. Which has demonstrated hostility to the UK public and which is therefore the greatest danger? A question with an obvious answer. On the face of it I am in agreement with you; Islamist terrorists pose more of an immediate, and direct risk to the UK than Jewish terrorists. This comes into question though if we look at the indirect threats. Israel is clearly, IMO, as much a destabilising influence on the Middle East as Hamas and their ilk, which could lead to us being brought into a much wider, and far more dangerous phase of conflict. But Israel has nukes, is clearly willing to ignore any agreements it has signed to achieve the religious extremist outcome of Eretz Israel and has been dishonest with the UK in framing UK citizens for the actions of a Mossad Assassination Squad. There is also the fact that the US willingly turns a blind-eye to anything Israel does, but would intervene, and has intervened, when Islamist actors have become a serious threat. So, in the wider sense I think the current Israeli regime (which is IMO bordering on roque-state territory) and Hamas are about as bad as one another in the overall risk they pose to the UK. I don't know about any of you guys, but I make it a point of principle that I don't lie to, or betray my friends. So when Israel did so in the Mahmoud al-Mabhouh incident it was a serious line in the sand moment for me; and that was not the first time Israel had used faked UK passports to commit crimes, Israel was previously cautioned by British authorities in 1987 for similar actions. These are NOT the actions of a "friend" IMO. Neither party (Hamas or current Israeli government) are our "friends", both would gladly stab us in the back if it furthered their own interests. Hamas don't even pretend to be our friends, they are "honest" in their approach to us; Israel does pretend to be our friend, even though its actions tell a very different story. All The Best
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 19, 2024 0:55:03 GMT
well for someone who knows you keep denying it. The time has passed for a 2 state solution - it has been rejected so many times now, over so many decades, that neither sides want one. So leave them to it. Eventually, whether by war or peace, they will both come to a situation which they can both live with. An example is Korea - they have officially been at war for 74 years now, and both side scan live with the status quo.But that requires near on 30,000 US Troops stationed near the DMZ. Israel will never allow a similar DMZ because that would impinge on their ability to continue to steal Palestinian land. Hamas as permanent belligerents would never agree to it. The Palestinian National Authority might agree to it. Israeli resistance would mean the US would never commit troops to it, and there arguably isn't another Western Democratic nation with the military wherewithal to commit to policing a DMZ. I also remind you that the official position of the PNA is (or was prior Israel's over-zealous reaction to Oct 7th) that a 2SS is a necessary element of any lasting peace deal. Israel's official position is that a 2SS must be prevented at any cost - even perpetuating a conflict that takes Israeli lives. All The Best
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on May 19, 2024 2:33:09 GMT
My reasoning is similar: How many terrorist acts have been planned, prepared or carried out by Jews in this country? Now compare and contrast with how many have been planned, prepared or carried out by Islamists. Which has demonstrated hostility to the UK public and which is therefore the greatest danger? A question with an obvious answer. On the face of it I am in agreement with you; Islamist terrorists pose more of an immediate, and direct risk to the UK than Jewish terrorists. This comes into question though if we look at the indirect threats. Israel is clearly, IMO, as much a destabilising influence on the Middle East as Hamas and their ilk, which could lead to us being brought into a much wider, and far more dangerous phase of conflict. But Israel has nukes, is clearly willing to ignore any agreements it has signed to achieve the religious extremist outcome of Eretz Israel and has been dishonest with the UK in framing UK citizens for the actions of a Mossad Assassination Squad. There is also the fact that the US willingly turns a blind-eye to anything Israel does, but would intervene, and has intervened, when Islamist actors have become a serious threat. So, in the wider sense I think the current Israeli regime (which is IMO bordering on roque-state territory) and Hamas are about as bad as one another in the overall risk they pose to the UK. I don't know about any of you guys, but I make it a point of principle that I don't lie to, or betray my friends. So when Israel did so in the Mahmoud al-Mabhouh incident it was a serious line in the sand moment for me; and that was not the first time Israel had used faked UK passports to commit crimes, Israel was previously cautioned by British authorities in 1987 for similar actions. These are NOT the actions of a "friend" IMO. Neither party (Hamas or current Israeli government) are our "friends", both would gladly stab us in the back if it furthered their own interests. Hamas don't even pretend to be our friends, they are "honest" in their approach to us; Israel does pretend to be our friend, even though its actions tell a very different story. All The Best Oh, I've never considered Israel to be a friend. They can't afford to be - they're facing an existential threat. But there again arguably so are we, and from the same quarter. So while I don't trust Israel to act in anything other than absolute self-interest, I do understand their position. We share a common enemy and while the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend, I am more sympathetic to those with whom we share common ground than to those who wish to actively do us harm.
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 19, 2024 3:05:12 GMT
On the face of it I am in agreement with you; Islamist terrorists pose more of an immediate, and direct risk to the UK than Jewish terrorists. This comes into question though if we look at the indirect threats. Israel is clearly, IMO, as much a destabilising influence on the Middle East as Hamas and their ilk, which could lead to us being brought into a much wider, and far more dangerous phase of conflict. But Israel has nukes, is clearly willing to ignore any agreements it has signed to achieve the religious extremist outcome of Eretz Israel and has been dishonest with the UK in framing UK citizens for the actions of a Mossad Assassination Squad. There is also the fact that the US willingly turns a blind-eye to anything Israel does, but would intervene, and has intervened, when Islamist actors have become a serious threat. So, in the wider sense I think the current Israeli regime (which is IMO bordering on roque-state territory) and Hamas are about as bad as one another in the overall risk they pose to the UK. I don't know about any of you guys, but I make it a point of principle that I don't lie to, or betray my friends. So when Israel did so in the Mahmoud al-Mabhouh incident it was a serious line in the sand moment for me; and that was not the first time Israel had used faked UK passports to commit crimes, Israel was previously cautioned by British authorities in 1987 for similar actions. These are NOT the actions of a "friend" IMO. Neither party (Hamas or current Israeli government) are our "friends", both would gladly stab us in the back if it furthered their own interests. Hamas don't even pretend to be our friends, they are "honest" in their approach to us; Israel does pretend to be our friend, even though its actions tell a very different story. All The Best Oh, I've never considered Israel to be a friend. They can't afford to be - they're facing an existential threat. But there again arguably so are we, and from the same quarter. So while I don't trust Israel to act in anything other than absolute self-interest, I do understand their position. We share a common enemy and while the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend, I am more sympathetic to those with whom we share common ground than to those who wish to actively do us harm. If we believe Jewish propaganda they have always faced an existential threat. Though I don't personally know anyone naïve enough to believe that anymore. Moreover, would they face that alleged existential threat if they themselves were less belligerent? There's an old adage "everyone you meet is your mirror", maybe that applies here. I am not sure we do face an existential threat from the same quarter; would you care to elaborate? Sure, there's the Daily-Heil-esque "sharia law coming to a street near you" bullshit, but very little real evidence that such a threat exists. What common ground do we share with Israel? All The Best
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on May 19, 2024 4:52:02 GMT
If we believe Jewish propaganda they have always faced an existential threat... If you believe that the Holocaust was "Jewish Propaganda" then you have some serious anti-Semitism going on. Moreover, would they face that alleged existential threat if they themselves were less belligerent? So October 7th was their own fault? Epic victim blaming there. ...I am not sure we do face an existential threat from the same quarter; would you care to elaborate? Sure, there's the Daily-Heil-esque "sharia law coming to a street near you" bullshit, but very little real evidence that such a threat exists... Well only if you believe that 7/7, Glasgow Airport, MP Stephen Timms being stabbed, Lee Rigby, Westminster Bridge, Manchester Arena, London Bridge etc. etc. were "Daily-Heil-esque bullshit". Which is exactly why I call you "NullaVeritas" with your uncanny ability to completely ignore the truth.
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on May 19, 2024 6:47:31 GMT
well for someone who knows you keep denying it. The time has passed for a 2 state solution - it has been rejected so many times now, over so many decades, that neither sides want one. So leave them to it. Eventually, whether by war or peace, they will both come to a situation which they can both live with. An example is Korea - they have officially been at war for 74 years now, and both side scan live with the status quo.But that requires near on 30,000 US Troops stationed near the DMZ. Israel will never allow a similar DMZ because that would impinge on their ability to continue to steal Palestinian land. Hamas as permanent belligerents would never agree to it. The Palestinian National Authority might agree to it. Israeli resistance would mean the US would never commit troops to it, and there arguably isn't another Western Democratic nation with the military wherewithal to commit to policing a DMZ. I also remind you that the official position of the PNA is (or was prior Israel's over-zealous reaction to Oct 7th) that a 2SS is a necessary element of any lasting peace deal. Israel's official position is that a 2SS must be prevented at any cost - even perpetuating a conflict that takes Israeli lives. All The Best Fatah have rejected every 2SS offered to them in the past and they are not the most popular political force in Gaza and the West Bank. Hamas who are the most popular reject a 2SS and continue to call for the destruction of Israel. The only people who are talking about a 2SS are those not living in the region.
|
|
|
Post by Orac on May 19, 2024 10:39:59 GMT
My reasoning is similar: How many terrorist acts have been planned, prepared or carried out by Jews in this country? Now compare and contrast with how many have been planned, prepared or carried out by Islamists. Which has demonstrated hostility to the UK public and which is therefore the greatest danger? A question with an obvious answer. On the face of it I am in agreement with you; Islamist terrorists pose more of an immediate, and direct risk to the UK than Jewish terrorists. This comes into question though if we look at the indirect threats. Israel is clearly, IMO, as much a destabilising influence on the Middle East as Hamas and their ilk, which could lead to us being brought into a much wider, and far more dangerous phase of conflict. 'Destabilising influence' = gets attacked by barbaric medieval simpletons why can't do long term thinking. In this way, the simpletons are Israel's fault
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 19, 2024 10:56:34 GMT
If we believe Jewish propaganda they have always faced an existential threat... 1) If you believe that the Holocaust was "Jewish Propaganda" then you have some serious anti-Semitism going on. Moreover, would they face that alleged existential threat if they themselves were less belligerent? 2) So October 7th was their own fault? Epic victim blaming there. ...I am not sure we do face an existential threat from the same quarter; would you care to elaborate? Sure, there's the Daily-Heil-esque "sharia law coming to a street near you" bullshit, but very little real evidence that such a threat exists... Well only if you believe that 7/7, Glasgow Airport, MP Stephen Timms being stabbed, Lee Rigby, Westminster Bridge, Manchester Arena, London Bridge etc. etc. were "Daily-Heil-esque bullshit". 3) Which is exactly why I call you "NullaVeritas" with your uncanny ability to completely ignore the truth. 1) Never denied the Holocaust, that's your imagination. I am talking about every single time the propaganda that Jews have "always faced an existential threat" is used. Yes, for sure, some of the times that claim has been made it has been true - the holocaust being the obvious one - but every time? 2) My uncle is on his 4th wife. With the first wife the reason for the divorce was: "It wasn't my fault, I did nothing wrong, she is a right bitch". Sure, that is perhaps possible. With the second wife the reason for the divorce was: "It wasn't my fault, I did nothing wrong, she is a right bitch". Is it possible someone has been so unlucky twice? Possible, but surely unlikely. With the third wife the reason for the divorce was: "It wasn't my fault, I did nothing wrong, she is a right bitch". At this point, maybe he has to be honest and say "Yeah, I was at least partially to blame" because it is just not credible for him to be a permanent, unwitting, and undeserved "victim" of "forever bitches". Apply that to Jewish claim that they have ALWAYS faced an existential threat, they have ALWAYS been victims. Which of these is the most credible explanation: 1) In every nation they have ever lived, at any time in human history, no matter the ethnicity, religion, or social and governmental structures in place, every single place that the Jews have lived has been - for absolutely no reason at all - constantly Anti-Semitic. 2) In at least some of those cases, the Jews have engaged in activities that have led to them being ostracised, and even persecuted. I'll give you a hint, it ain't 1) and I can prove it with just one example: Under the majority of Roman Rule all religions were tolerated, all races and creeds were largely treated equally (yes there was slavery, but a Roman could end up a slave, just like a Gaul, German, African etc.). There was, essentially only one rule: Pay Caesar his due. The Jews chose not to pay taxes, and were punished for it, leading to full scale armed revolt, that the Romans had no choice but to put down. This was NOT Anti-Semitism, it was "Anti-Criminal and Anti-Revolt" - yet is is sometimes used as "proof" that Anti-Semitism has always existed. Moreover, when it is claimed that Israel is engaged in genocide in Gaza useful-idiot defenders of Israel sometimes claim that "Israel could wipe Gaza off the map, the fact it hasn't not killed more people is proof there is no genocide. Now apply that reasoning to the ludicrously false claim that Anti-Semitism has always existed, in every culture, throughout human history. If that were true the Jews would have been completely wiped out millennia ago. But they are, thankfully, still here. 3) You refuse to call me by my proper Forum name because you are a petulant juvenile mind with the intellectual inability to win a debate on the merit of your arguments, and try therefore to do so by ridicule. All The Best
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on May 19, 2024 15:21:50 GMT
1) If you believe that the Holocaust was "Jewish Propaganda" then you have some serious anti-Semitism going on. 2) So October 7th was their own fault? Epic victim blaming there. Well only if you believe that 7/7, Glasgow Airport, MP Stephen Timms being stabbed, Lee Rigby, Westminster Bridge, Manchester Arena, London Bridge etc. etc. were "Daily-Heil-esque bullshit". 3) Which is exactly why I call you "NullaVeritas" with your uncanny ability to completely ignore the truth. 1) Never denied the Holocaust, that's your imagination. I am talking about every single time the propaganda that Jews have "always faced an existential threat" is used. Yes, for sure, some of the times that claim has been made it has been true - the holocaust being the obvious one - but every time? 2) My uncle is on his 4th wife. With the first wife the reason for the divorce was: "It wasn't my fault, I did nothing wrong, she is a right bitch". Sure, that is perhaps possible. With the second wife the reason for the divorce was: "It wasn't my fault, I did nothing wrong, she is a right bitch". Is it possible someone has been so unlucky twice? Possible, but surely unlikely. With the third wife the reason for the divorce was: "It wasn't my fault, I did nothing wrong, she is a right bitch". At this point, maybe he has to be honest and say "Yeah, I was at least partially to blame" because it is just not credible for him to be a permanent, unwitting, and undeserved "victim" of "forever bitches". Apply that to Jewish claim that they have ALWAYS faced an existential threat, they have ALWAYS been victims. Which of these is the most credible explanation: 1) In every nation they have ever lived, at any time in human history, no matter the ethnicity, religion, or social and governmental structures in place, every single place that the Jews have lived has been - for absolutely no reason at all - constantly Anti-Semitic. 2) In at least some of those cases, the Jews have engaged in activities that have led to them being ostracised, and even persecuted. I'll give you a hint, it ain't 1) and I can prove it with just one example: Under the majority of Roman Rule all religions were tolerated, all races and creeds were largely treated equally (yes there was slavery, but a Roman could end up a slave, just like a Gaul, German, African etc.). There was, essentially only one rule: Pay Caesar his due. The Jews chose not to pay taxes, and were punished for it, leading to full scale armed revolt, that the Romans had no choice but to put down. This was NOT Anti-Semitism, it was "Anti-Criminal and Anti-Revolt" - yet is is sometimes used as "proof" that Anti-Semitism has always existed. Moreover, when it is claimed that Israel is engaged in genocide in Gaza useful-idiot defenders of Israel sometimes claim that "Israel could wipe Gaza off the map, the fact it hasn't not killed more people is proof there is no genocide. Now apply that reasoning to the ludicrously false claim that Anti-Semitism has always existed, in every culture, throughout human history. If that were true the Jews would have been completely wiped out millennia ago. But they are, thankfully, still here. 3) You refuse to call me by my proper Forum name because you are a petulant juvenile mind with the intellectual inability to win a debate on the merit of your arguments, and try therefore to do so by ridicule. All The Best Typical whataboutery from a typical generic lefty.
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 19, 2024 15:37:20 GMT
1) Never denied the Holocaust, that's your imagination. I am talking about every single time the propaganda that Jews have "always faced an existential threat" is used. Yes, for sure, some of the times that claim has been made it has been true - the holocaust being the obvious one - but every time? 2) My uncle is on his 4th wife. With the first wife the reason for the divorce was: "It wasn't my fault, I did nothing wrong, she is a right bitch". Sure, that is perhaps possible. With the second wife the reason for the divorce was: "It wasn't my fault, I did nothing wrong, she is a right bitch". Is it possible someone has been so unlucky twice? Possible, but surely unlikely. With the third wife the reason for the divorce was: "It wasn't my fault, I did nothing wrong, she is a right bitch". At this point, maybe he has to be honest and say "Yeah, I was at least partially to blame" because it is just not credible for him to be a permanent, unwitting, and undeserved "victim" of "forever bitches". Apply that to Jewish claim that they have ALWAYS faced an existential threat, they have ALWAYS been victims. Which of these is the most credible explanation: 1) In every nation they have ever lived, at any time in human history, no matter the ethnicity, religion, or social and governmental structures in place, every single place that the Jews have lived has been - for absolutely no reason at all - constantly Anti-Semitic. 2) In at least some of those cases, the Jews have engaged in activities that have led to them being ostracised, and even persecuted. I'll give you a hint, it ain't 1) and I can prove it with just one example: Under the majority of Roman Rule all religions were tolerated, all races and creeds were largely treated equally (yes there was slavery, but a Roman could end up a slave, just like a Gaul, German, African etc.). There was, essentially only one rule: Pay Caesar his due. The Jews chose not to pay taxes, and were punished for it, leading to full scale armed revolt, that the Romans had no choice but to put down. This was NOT Anti-Semitism, it was "Anti-Criminal and Anti-Revolt" - yet is is sometimes used as "proof" that Anti-Semitism has always existed. Moreover, when it is claimed that Israel is engaged in genocide in Gaza useful-idiot defenders of Israel sometimes claim that "Israel could wipe Gaza off the map, the fact it hasn't not killed more people is proof there is no genocide. Now apply that reasoning to the ludicrously false claim that Anti-Semitism has always existed, in every culture, throughout human history. If that were true the Jews would have been completely wiped out millennia ago. But they are, thankfully, still here. 3) You refuse to call me by my proper Forum name because you are a petulant juvenile mind with the intellectual inability to win a debate on the merit of your arguments, and try therefore to do so by ridicule. All The Best Typical whataboutery from a typical generic lefty. Well done for proving point 3) for me. Must be so proud of yourself. All The Best
|
|
|
Post by The Squeezed Middle on May 19, 2024 15:46:52 GMT
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on May 19, 2024 16:02:40 GMT
Ah, can't even be arsed to type and still proves point 3) for me. There are no ends to the many ways you can demonstrate your intellectual deficiencies, are there? All The Best
|
|