If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN) Video Live CNN discussion between an Israeli and a Palestinian. Israeli: They are intentionally targetting civilians, and we do not do that. Palestinian: "Well. I :BOOM:: BOOM: :BOOM: ++++ NO CARRIER +++"   (cnn.com) divider line 275
    More: Video, Israelis, Palestinians, NO CARRIER  
•       •       •

9190 clicks; posted to Video » on 16 Nov 2012 at 7:13 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



275 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-17 02:05:53 AM

Party Boy: Tellingthem: You know the more i read about this the more i think that both Hamas and Israel have made a tactical error here. I think that Hamas just wanted a little dust-up like they have had before and misjudged how Israel would respond. It also seems like Israel misread hamas intentions and hit back a lot harder than hamas figured they would.  Which triggered a much larger response from Hamas and other groups. And now it just keeps escalating on itself.

I'm having a real difficult time finding a clear "start."

[i.imgur.com image 250x141]

Its like trying to pick out one break where this turns from white to black.
If you are able to do that, please fill me in.


Not a real start i would say but a slow build. Kind of bits and pieces i've strung together. It seem like Hamas was keeping relatively quiet until October. Link
"In recent years Hamas, which does not recognize Israel's right to exist, has largely adhered to an informal cease-fire, raising questions on both sides about the timing of the latest escalation."
 
2012-11-17 02:08:37 AM

Party Boy: PsiChick: Pretty much what I was saying. :)

Yeah, I'm not really arguing as much as I'm sitting here, wanting a little background.

No antagonism. Hot chocolate.


Hot chocolate is fantastic. Someday I'll figure out how to add peppermint to it without needing to melt candy in...
 
2012-11-17 02:16:16 AM

Tellingthem: Not a real start i would say but a slow build. Kind of bits and pieces i've strung together. It seem like Hamas was keeping relatively quiet until October. Link
"In recent years Hamas, which does not recognize Israel's right to exist, has largely adhered to an informal cease-fire, raising questions on both sides about the timing of the latest escalation."


Alright, lets play a game. I hope it doesnt engender the passionate feelings this subject usually has.

You pick an event, and Ill pick a counter event within a week. Will you be OK with that. I'm sure we could stretch that back for a few years. If you are not OK, thats fine. let me know.

Full disclosure, Isabel Kershner, the author of that piece, is "thoroughly Israeli" and an author listed in the Israel Hasbara Committee.
 
2012-11-17 02:17:16 AM

Leo Bloom's Freakout: El Pachuco: gaspode: LasersHurt:

Also, absolutely nobody believes that the Israelis are going to not hurt any civilians. That's ridiculous. I'd go so far as to say they're not intentionally targeting major civilian targets, sure, they're not monsters. But they're bombing the place - they're gonna get civilians.

Two things there..

There IS a difference between targeting civilians and simply not giving a fark or making any effort to avoid them, but it isn't a huge difference in the end.
A non-trivial faction in Israel considers ALL Palestinians to be legitimate military targets. Just as a (probably larger) faction in the Palestinian population thinks all Israelis are legitimate military targets.

There is plenty of revulsion to go around unfortunately

There's also a huge difference in technology - the Palestinians are using WW2-era low-tech rockets, fired in that general direction over there and uncontrollable after launch.

The Israelis are firing guided missiles from state-of-the-art helicopters and airplanes, or dropping bombs from aircraft with computer-aided target systems. They are able to put a missile into a single specific window on a building if they want to. That the bombs and missiles and missiles are hitting all over Gaza is not an accident.

I'm not taking sides with that comment - it's the reality of the situation.

Add in the "Hamas is using civilian structures and civilians as human shields" factor and it becomes very easy to write off casualities. Not sure how often it's true, but seems possible if the people launching rockets are members of the region who are militarized by the living conditions, religion, or other motivating factors; they could be using their homes as improv launch platforms. Unless it's fixed, they make an apartment complex a military target by wanting to launch from the high ground.


Back up. It should NEVER be very easy to write off casualties. Just as it should never be easy to pull the It's Ok As Long As You're X card. The dehumanization of the Palestinians is absurd. The putting on a pedestal of Isrealis, Israeli motives and Israeli actions is absurd.

The day can't come soon enough when Israel -- like apartheid era South Africa before it -- is allowed to be judged fully as the monster it is.
 
2012-11-17 02:18:53 AM

PsiChick: Hot chocolate is fantastic.


Yes. Its something everyone can come together on.
 
2012-11-17 02:19:14 AM
You can see the light of the blast reflected in the guys face.

/danger close
/make it rain
 
2012-11-17 02:24:56 AM

Party Boy: PsiChick: Hot chocolate is fantastic.

Yes. Its something everyone can come together on.


So we flood the Middle East with hot chocolate. BRILLIANT!
 
2012-11-17 02:26:25 AM

PsiChick: Party Boy: PsiChick: Pretty much what I was saying. :)

Yeah, I'm not really arguing as much as I'm sitting here, wanting a little background.

No antagonism. Hot chocolate.

Hot chocolate is fantastic. Someday I'll figure out how to add peppermint to it without needing to melt candy in...


Peppermint Schnapps.
 
2012-11-17 02:28:50 AM

Mentalpatient87: So we flood the Middle East with hot chocolate. BRILLIANT!


Bonzo_1116: Peppermint Schnapps.


Heh.
 
2012-11-17 02:35:32 AM

Party Boy: Tellingthem: Not a real start i would say but a slow build. Kind of bits and pieces i've strung together. It seem like Hamas was keeping relatively quiet until October. Link
"In recent years Hamas, which does not recognize Israel's right to exist, has largely adhered to an informal cease-fire, raising questions on both sides about the timing of the latest escalation."

Alright, lets play a game. I hope it doesnt engender the passionate feelings this subject usually has.

You pick an event, and Ill pick a counter event within a week. Will you be OK with that. I'm sure we could stretch that back for a few years. If you are not OK, thats fine. let me know.

Full disclosure, Isabel Kershner, the author of that piece, is "thoroughly Israeli" and an author listed in the Israel Hasbara Committee.


No passion feelings here. i'm not trying to say one side is better than another or anything like that. Basically i think the entire thing was a power play for Hamas to start asserting more control over the territories. And that article you posted about the permanent truce kind of filled in the blank Basically I'll lay it out. Hamas boycotted the recent elections where the PLO had a not so great result. Also the PLO wants to go to the UN to try and get non-member status. And they have accused Hamas of trying to sabotage that. So i think they started the little dust-up hoping to get divert attention away from the un thing and also because of the weak election. Also it would help them get some popularity and support in the West Bank. And if that permanent peace treaty was true that would help cement them into power by weakening the PLO and their solution and coming up with their own. Add to that the Hamas friendly government in Egypt for additional it just kind of made sense. To me at least.

\ It could also be the dumbest idea in the world. but it's Friday night, I'm home and I got nothing better to do.
 
2012-11-17 02:43:21 AM

Tellingthem: yousaywut: Tellingthem: You know the more i read about this the more i think that both Hamas and Israel have made a tactical error here. I think that Hamas just wanted a little dust-up like they have had before and misjudged how Israel would respond. It also seems like Israel misread hamas intentions and hit back a lot harder than hamas figured they would.  Which triggered a much larger response from Hamas and other groups. And now it just keeps escalating on itself.

Is this a repeat from the past 30 years or so?

Kind of i guess. It just seems like there has been a slow progression towards some stability over the last couple of years. And for everything to suddenly explode like this and in this dramatic of a fashion. It just seems more odd than the usual spats they have.

\or maybe i'm just reading to much and it's just one of those things you can't explain


It's a repeated pattern over and over again. Palestinian fringe groups attack Israel with little hits here and there until someone says enough and then Israel hits back harder and everyone in the world goes aaaw you shouldn't have done that. Next step peace negotiations during which there will be little hits again and so on. It is ridiculous and sad since both sides should really be pissed at Britain for setting up the whole deal.
 
2012-11-17 02:45:45 AM

Tellingthem: No passion feelings here. i'm not trying to say one side is better than another or anything like that. Basically i think the entire thing was a power play for Hamas to start asserting more control over the territories. And that article you posted about the permanent truce kind of filled in the blank Basically I'll lay it out. Hamas boycotted the recent elections where the PLO had a not so great result. Also the PLO wants to go to the UN to try and get non-member status. And they have accused Hamas of trying to sabotage that. So i think they started the little dust-up hoping to get divert attention away from the un thing and also because of the weak election. Also it would help them get some popularity and support in the West Bank. And if that permanent peace treaty was true that would help cement them into power by weakening the PLO and their solution and coming up with their own. Add to that the Hamas friendly government in Egypt for additional it just kind of made sense. To me at least.


But there are a few implications here that need to be addressed.
• First is the omission of the that the Israelis -the big dog- lack agency. The powerful member who has the area • blockaded and is preparing to invade is not mentioned. Instead, all agency of the issue is given to Hamas. Peculiar.
• Second, if you are going to talk about the entire thing, as it were, you've defined a discrete event with a start. The problem is, how do you do that?
• Third, you need to mention the Israeli elections.
 
2012-11-17 02:53:17 AM

yousaywut: Palestinian fringe groups attack Israel with little hits here and there until someone says enough and then Israel hits back


This is a narrative, where a side is relegated to a reluctant actor, and their actions are measured in self defense. its an overly simplistic viewpoint that omits concepts like the blockade or the settlements that are widely known.

The problem is, when this paradigm is criticized, some people can get rather inflamed over the issue and try to cram in the paradigm over the criticism. For example, a common reply is to say, incorrectly, that the blockade was in place only in response to Hamas. However, the blockade was in place years before this. Airspace and sea ports were controlled during the 2005 "withdrawal."

One of the largest problems to dialogue on this subject are the simplistic paradigms, and the outright anger you face when exposing it as such. its the only subject where I've received death threats.
 
2012-11-17 03:05:02 AM

Party Boy: Tellingthem: No passion feelings here. i'm not trying to say one side is better than another or anything like that. Basically i think the entire thing was a power play for Hamas to start asserting more control over the territories. And that article you posted about the permanent truce kind of filled in the blank Basically I'll lay it out. Hamas boycotted the recent elections where the PLO had a not so great result. Also the PLO wants to go to the UN to try and get non-member status. And they have accused Hamas of trying to sabotage that. So i think they started the little dust-up hoping to get divert attention away from the un thing and also because of the weak election. Also it would help them get some popularity and support in the West Bank. And if that permanent peace treaty was true that would help cement them into power by weakening the PLO and their solution and coming up with their own. Add to that the Hamas friendly government in Egypt for additional it just kind of made sense. To me at least.

But there are a few implications here that need to be addressed.
• First is the omission of the that the Israelis -the big dog- lack agency. The powerful member who has the area • blockaded and is preparing to invade is not mentioned. Instead, all agency of the issue is given to Hamas. Peculiar.
• Second, if you are going to talk about the entire thing, as it were, you've defined a discrete event with a start. The problem is, how do you do that?
• Third, you need to mention the Israeli elections.


It's all a rough theory that hit me about an hour ago so it is relatively simplistic still. Just bits and pieces that seem to fit into a larger puzzle. I'm not trying to figure out the entire middle east nor solve the problem. For me i just saw a possible rationale for this one specific event. i know it is a very complicated history and there have been waxes and wanes to the violence. I'm just one of those people who finds the entire thing interesting and like to keep tabs on it. And i've been reading up on it a lot more in the past few days. And just had this moment of "inspiration?" where I thought maybe I could see something with some clarity into it. Or I could be totally wrong on everything and just rambling like a bored ex-history major. I could expand upon it further if you would like. I'm just not sure if it would be worth it though...especially if I'm way off the mark.
 
2012-11-17 03:05:06 AM

Fubini: PsiChick: Since you don't have TotalFark, I'm not sure how well you can see archived links, so here's a few choice quotes on Israel from fundies--the top two probably are enough, here's the Republican Party slamming the Democratic Platform for not wanting to hand Jerusalem to Israel exclusively, a policy which, if enacted, would cause a major war, (also listed on AP, I'm just using a lazy link) and here's a viewpoint I've found to be fairly common among evangelicals about Israel's ultimate role in the end times. Yes, it's hard to say that, normally, the Republican party or right wing would support a backhanded relationship with Israel, but the Republican party actively uses religion to make its platform and policy. Remember that panel of religious clergy debating on birth control for women? Those people are more moderate than the ones I'm talking about.

Show us actual US politicians voicing support for Israel in order to bring about armageddon. Cite reputable journalistic sources, or their own platforms.

Go ahead, I'll wait.

I'm not arguing for or against US intervention in this affair, but it's pretty clear that you've let some warped ideas get into your head. There are far more rational reasons why US politicians would like to see an Israeli conflict (like our weapons and private military industries). I'm not trying to say that no one has ever taken the point of view you're talking about, but they're the far and away exception. The vast majority of these people don't even mention religion when talking about US policy on Israel, much less advocating based off of biblical prophesy.


I'm going to drop a fact on you that I hope will challenge your assumption about this...

Israel is the only country in the world that recieves US military aid that is allowed to spend 25% of it on their own domestic military projects. While certainly there is a large amount of pork barreling going on in the 3 billion a year we give them in military aid, a large portion of that agreement can't be settled on the case of greed alone, since we are giving them hundreds of millions of dollars to spend as they wish, and not with our military industrial complex.
 
2012-11-17 03:13:40 AM

Tellingthem: It's all a rough theory that hit me about an hour ago so it is relatively simplistic still. Just bits and pieces that seem to fit into a larger puzzle. I'm not trying to figure out the entire middle east nor solve the problem. For me i just saw a possible rationale for this one specific event. i know it is a very complicated history and there have been waxes and wanes to the violence. I'm just one of those people who finds the entire thing interesting and like to keep tabs on it. And i've been reading up on it a lot more in the past few days. And just had this moment of "inspiration?" where I thought maybe I could see something with some clarity into it. Or I could be totally wrong on everything and just rambling like a bored ex-history major. I could expand upon it further if you would like. I'm just not sure if it would be worth it though...especially if I'm way off the mark.


Considering how you are going to have a really tough time finding a "start" among the gradient of hostilities, its going to be beneficial to look at a comprehensive, mainstream, and widely respected work on the subject. Anything less has the very likely capacity to steer you towards abject propaganda. It is the safe and, ultimately, your quickest bet.
 
2012-11-17 03:20:26 AM
What a joke you are CNN. The whole thing was funny and sad.

CNN cuts away to pictures of family while the Israeli is talking, showing their obvious bias in this "debate". They found a Palestinian willing to talk but wanted to use him as a prop to slant their portrayal of the conflict as they saw fit. Like when Fox News finds a token Democrat to badger yet call it being open to all sides. But they never realized they'd capture the sounds of bombs going off nearby on video, with the last one showing a reflection of the bomb blast right on his face!

None of the execs at CNN really cared Mr. Sulamain survived. They just regret that they gave away a sliver of truth at how much worse the average person in Gaza is suffering compared to the average Israeli.
 
2012-11-17 03:22:31 AM
The classics

The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War by James L. Gelvin

Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents by Charles D. Smith

You can do this right, the first time. It can seem like a lot of reading, but you seriously handle the issue much faster. Writing something like this is painstaking and difficult to synthesize. When you get it, you are getting a sleek and comprehensive, one stop shopping work - despite its size. Imagine being pretty well read on the subject in the span of about a week. Thats an amazing thing.
 
2012-11-17 03:26:06 AM

Party Boy: Tellingthem: It's all a rough theory that hit me about an hour ago so it is relatively simplistic still. Just bits and pieces that seem to fit into a larger puzzle. I'm not trying to figure out the entire middle east nor solve the problem. For me i just saw a possible rationale for this one specific event. i know it is a very complicated history and there have been waxes and wanes to the violence. I'm just one of those people who finds the entire thing interesting and like to keep tabs on it. And i've been reading up on it a lot more in the past few days. And just had this moment of "inspiration?" where I thought maybe I could see something with some clarity into it. Or I could be totally wrong on everything and just rambling like a bored ex-history major. I could expand upon it further if you would like. I'm just not sure if it would be worth it though...especially if I'm way off the mark.

Considering how you are going to have a really tough time finding a "start" among the gradient of hostilities, its going to be beneficial to look at a comprehensive, mainstream, and widely respected work on the subject. Anything less has the very likely capacity to steer you towards abject propaganda. It is the safe and, ultimately, your quickest bet.


Yeah I know, kind of one of those ideas where i get really excited about it, but to actually make a coherent case for it would take quite awhile if it would be even possible. Kind of wish i was back in college. Would make for one hell of a research paper. Seems funny how just a couple of words in an article can get the hamsters in my head a churning.
 
2012-11-17 03:26:25 AM

beer4breakfast: What a joke you are CNN. The whole thing was funny and sad.

CNN cuts away to pictures of family while the Israeli is talking, showing their obvious bias in this "debate". They found a Palestinian willing to talk but wanted to use him as a prop to slant their portrayal of the conflict as they saw fit. Like when Fox News finds a token Democrat to badger yet call it being open to all sides. But they never realized they'd capture the sounds of bombs going off nearby on video, with the last one showing a reflection of the bomb blast right on his face!

None of the execs at CNN really cared Mr. Sulamain survived. They just regret that they gave away a sliver of truth at how much worse the average person in Gaza is suffering compared to the average Israeli.


I just watched the nightly news on Tivo. Every perspective was from the Israeli side. There were perspectives from the Israeli PM to the common person. The Palestinians were covered in so how they launch rockets. What happened on CNN is a unique perspective for U.S. television media, even if it was unintentional. We usually get our bombing human side from Sderot.
If you get your information from the US TV, thats likely what you are going to find.
 
2012-11-17 03:29:59 AM

Tellingthem: Yeah I know, kind of one of those ideas where i get really excited about it, but to actually make a coherent case for it would take quite awhile if it would be even possible. Kind of wish i was back in college. Would make for one hell of a research paper. Seems funny how just a couple of words in an article can get the hamsters in my head a churning.


Imagine that you can read a comprehensive work (or two), and in the span of about a week (a month if you are busy, you can be quite knowledgeable on the the subject. The hard part is having someone prepare that work for you. Its an amazing thing. You don't need to wonder. What you are looking for is there. The extra bonus, that information stays relevant. its not like you get to inject a deep knowledgeable about the Austrian Empire in topical conversations.
 
2012-11-17 03:31:38 AM

Party Boy: The classics

The Israel-Palestine Conflict: One Hundred Years of War by James L. Gelvin

Palestine and the Arab-Israeli Conflict: A History with Documents by Charles D. Smith

You can do this right, the first time. It can seem like a lot of reading, but you seriously handle the issue much faster. Writing something like this is painstaking and difficult to synthesize. When you get it, you are getting a sleek and comprehensive, one stop shopping work - despite its size. Imagine being pretty well read on the subject in the span of about a week. Thats an amazing thing.


Thanks always appreciate some good books to read.
 
2012-11-17 03:33:44 AM
I chopped the sentences up and borked some of the grammar up there. whew.
 
2012-11-17 03:37:32 AM

Tellingthem: Thanks always appreciate some good books to read.


Thats your best bet. its your fastest route to ass-kicking foundational knowledge.

I see gelvins work is expensive now.
theres this

One Land, Two Peoples: The Conflict Over Palestine, Second Edition (Dilemmas in World Politics) by Deborah J. Gerner

and a more, ummm, myth breaking work by Benny Morris called Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001

but I'd put them under the first two. We're looking for totally mainstream, well-regarded, and comprehensive.
 
2012-11-17 03:39:45 AM

YouAreItNoTagBacks: Best strategy for both sides: Israel stops building settlements, lightens the blockade to allow aid and stops trying to block the PLO in the UN. This would take away some of Hamas' justification for violence and raise global sympathy for Israel. At the same time, Abbas could that window to push for non-violent resistance and counter terrorist messaging.

Chances of that happening without serious pressure from the US on Israel...0.


Israel was attacked first, and now they should retreat...??? Where do you live that you would feel the same way if a terrorist group fired rockets into your neighborhood?
 
2012-11-17 03:40:15 AM

Party Boy: yousaywut: Palestinian fringe groups attack Israel with little hits here and there until someone says enough and then Israel hits back

This is a narrative, where a side is relegated to a reluctant actor, and their actions are measured in self defense. its an overly simplistic viewpoint that omits concepts like the blockade or the settlements that are widely known.

The problem is, when this paradigm is criticized, some people can get rather inflamed over the issue and try to cram in the paradigm over the criticism. For example, a common reply is to say, incorrectly, that the blockade was in place only in response to Hamas. However, the blockade was in place years before this. Airspace and sea ports were controlled during the 2005 "withdrawal."

One of the largest problems to dialogue on this subject are the simplistic paradigms, and the outright anger you face when exposing it as such. its the only subject where I've received death threats.


Silence infidel........I keel you.

Yes there are many factors not written in any simplified paradigm. For example before 1967 the Palestinians were attacking Israel. Now everyone wants Israel to go back to the 1967 lines. Yes I am aware that they were Jordanians and Egyptians I am not really trying to be dead on exact in my examples people have written entire dissertations on individual aspects of this conflict I am just too lazy for that much research.

It's really odd that having an entire existence based on violent struggle leads a country to be violent.

//There is no real way to go back and fix the past like I said someone somewhere has to start the forgiving and I am just not so sure that either side has the leadership capable of selling that yet.
 
2012-11-17 03:41:51 AM

tjfly: Israel was attacked first


Great. Lets have you pinpoint this clean break along this large gradient of a conflict.

It was certainly much easier to do this for the 2008 conflict. I see great difficulty for anyone selecting a break without it being very arbitrary. Maybe you will surprise me.
 
2012-11-17 03:46:22 AM

yousaywut: Silence infidel........I keel you.

Yes there are many factors not written in any simplified paradigm. For example before 1967 the Palestinians were attacking Israel. Now everyone wants Israel to go back to the 1967 lines. Yes I am aware that they were Jordanians and Egyptians I am not really trying to be dead on exact in my examples people have written entire dissertations on individual aspects of this conflict I am just too lazy for that much research.

It's really odd that having an entire existence based on violent struggle leads a country to be violent.

//There is no real way to go back and fix the past like I said someone somewhere has to start the forgiving and I am just not so sure that either side has the leadership capable of selling that yet.


The problem is, is that it really doesn't take a whole bunch of time to sit down with a solid comprehensive book and get yourself up to speed. Think about it. A week or a month and you have a solid foundation down. Thats it. Thats knowledge you'll absolutely use in the future.
 
2012-11-17 03:49:18 AM

Party Boy: tjfly: Israel was attacked first

Great. Lets have you pinpoint this clean break along this large gradient of a conflict.

It was certainly much easier to do this for the 2008 conflict. I see great difficulty for anyone selecting a break without it being very arbitrary. Maybe you will surprise me.


1948 founding day. there ya go:) but they were not attacked by Palestinians so there is that.Or maybe 400 BCE give or take a century I am not looking up dates attacked By the Romans and kicked out of the area. Or a few hundred years earlier attacked by the Greeks. There really is a rather long history of people attacking the area.

/ So I arbitrarily select The Roman invasion cause those guys were serious dicks until they had control.
 
2012-11-17 03:51:17 AM

Party Boy: beer4breakfast: What a joke you are CNN. The whole thing was funny and sad.

CNN cuts away to pictures of family while the Israeli is talking, showing their obvious bias in this "debate". They found a Palestinian willing to talk but wanted to use him as a prop to slant their portrayal of the conflict as they saw fit. Like when Fox News finds a token Democrat to badger yet call it being open to all sides. But they never realized they'd capture the sounds of bombs going off nearby on video, with the last one showing a reflection of the bomb blast right on his face!

None of the execs at CNN really cared Mr. Sulamain survived. They just regret that they gave away a sliver of truth at how much worse the average person in Gaza is suffering compared to the average Israeli.

I just watched the nightly news on Tivo. Every perspective was from the Israeli side. There were perspectives from the Israeli PM to the common person. The Palestinians were covered in so how they launch rockets. What happened on CNN is a unique perspective for U.S. television media, even if it was unintentional. We usually get our bombing human side from Sderot.
If you get your information from the US TV, thats likely what you are going to find.


You saw what you wanted to see. It's not that I am saying that you are full of shiat, it's just that humans have difficulty seeing things in a neutral eye when that person has picked a side. We tend to ignore information that does not conform to our preconceptions. I haven't see what you have, so I cannot comment on the content. All I am saying is that you shouldn't fall into the bias trap that we set ourselves up for.
 
2012-11-17 03:52:03 AM

Party Boy: yousaywut: Silence infidel........I keel you.

Yes there are many factors not written in any simplified paradigm. For example before 1967 the Palestinians were attacking Israel. Now everyone wants Israel to go back to the 1967 lines. Yes I am aware that they were Jordanians and Egyptians I am not really trying to be dead on exact in my examples people have written entire dissertations on individual aspects of this conflict I am just too lazy for that much research.

It's really odd that having an entire existence based on violent struggle leads a country to be violent.

//There is no real way to go back and fix the past like I said someone somewhere has to start the forgiving and I am just not so sure that either side has the leadership capable of selling that yet.

The problem is, is that it really doesn't take a whole bunch of time to sit down with a solid comprehensive book and get yourself up to speed. Think about it. A week or a month and you have a solid foundation down. Thats it. Thats knowledge you'll absolutely use in the future.


My foundation in solid though I admit most likely biased. I do however listen to all perspectives. Just to be fair I have been off and on reading on this particular conflict for going on 20 years. I do not pretend to be a scholar but I do have foundation.
 
2012-11-17 03:53:34 AM

CygnusDarius: If I had the money and resources, I'd:

1.- Use small nuclear weapons on both israel and palestine. Nothing big, but on key places (the Wall of Lamentations would be one, and since it's right next to a mosque, I'd hit two birds in one stone).
2.- do a massive announcement, basically saying "It was me. I am not tied to any both of the countries. I did it alone, with no one else helping me. I am waiting for you"
3.- Watch both countries unite against a common enemy. Peace is made.


The "Dr. Manhattan" Gambit?

Too bad this is actually a proxy war, with Hamas being supplied and controlled by Syria and Iran to keep Israel occupied in Gaza (and perhaps Lebanon, if Hezbollah gets involved), while Syria fights their civil war and Iran keeps on working towards getting The Bomb.
 
2012-11-17 03:55:01 AM

yousaywut: 1948 founding day. there ya go:)


If you note the book titles up there, you'll see dates going into the 1800's. Theres a reason for that, and its a very interesting story.

Theres a geometric curve to learning where, at the beginning, you can put a little bit of work and be able to talk to experts in the field. Then the curve flattens and you start throwing years into gaining just a little more knowledge.

Sometimes, i pick up something new just to have that easy exhilaration.

Grab one of those books. If you are feeling particularly _____, you can find them on the internet, for free. The authors dont get money for their effort, so i can't condone that. Take a week or so, get some heavy-hitting knowledge.
 
2012-11-17 03:57:02 AM

Party Boy: Tellingthem: Thanks always appreciate some good books to read.

Thats your best bet. its your fastest route to ass-kicking foundational knowledge.

I see gelvins work is expensive now.
theres this

One Land, Two Peoples: The Conflict Over Palestine, Second Edition (Dilemmas in World Politics) by Deborah J. Gerner

and a more, ummm, myth breaking work by Benny Morris called Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001

but I'd put them under the first two. We're looking for totally mainstream, well-regarded, and comprehensive.


thanks again. I'll have to start a list. Can never have to many books heh. i'll keep dabbling in my little theory as well. I doubt i'll come up with anything solid...but if i do i'll let you know. At the very least it keeps me thinking.
 
2012-11-17 03:57:25 AM

yousaywut: My foundation in solid though I admit most likely biased. I do however listen to all perspectives. Just to be fair I have been off and on reading on this particular conflict for going on 20 years. I do not pretend to be a scholar but I do have foundation.


Well, I guess I misinterpreted you when you said you were "too lazy for that much research." Apologies.

We can carry on if you like.
 
2012-11-17 03:58:52 AM

Tellingthem: thanks again. I'll have to start a list. Can never have to many books heh. i'll keep dabbling in my little theory as well. I doubt i'll come up with anything solid...but if i do i'll let you know. At the very least it keeps me thinking.


Please do. Email is in profile. its a wonderful story, and its always topical. Unbelievably topical.
 
2012-11-17 04:01:33 AM

Party Boy: yousaywut: My foundation in solid though I admit most likely biased. I do however listen to all perspectives. Just to be fair I have been off and on reading on this particular conflict for going on 20 years. I do not pretend to be a scholar but I do have foundation.

Well, I guess I misinterpreted you when you said you were "too lazy for that much research." Apologies.

We can carry on if you like.


No worries it's for me just an interesting subject with so many variables that you always learn from an honest discussion. As long as neither side gets too passionate and starts with the death threats which is common.
 
2012-11-17 04:16:39 AM

yousaywut: As long as neither side gets too passionate and starts with the death threats which is common.


Yes it is.
 
2012-11-17 04:45:11 AM

PsiChick: Party Boy: PsiChick: Pretty much what I was saying. :)

Yeah, I'm not really arguing as much as I'm sitting here, wanting a little background.

No antagonism. Hot chocolate.

Hot chocolate is fantastic. Someday I'll figure out how to add peppermint to it without needing to melt candy in...


www.torani.com
 
2012-11-17 05:02:04 AM
Lebensraum is all I take away from this.
 
2012-11-17 05:31:17 AM

sophus_tree: "Those were Israeli warplanes bombing Gaza, but I'm not going to comment on that. I'm not going to let it interrupt this debate."


This kid is a hero...
 
2012-11-17 05:38:26 AM

LasersHurt: sophus_tree: Holy fark. The guy says "You can hear what's happening and I'm not going to comment on that. We need to get past 'Who's the victim and who's the victimizer'--we need to get that out of the way and get on with things."

CNN: "Wait--what was that sound?"

"Those were Israeli warplanes bombing Gaza, but I'm not going to comment on that. I'm not going to let it interrupt this debate."

Wow. Hope I someday have brassies like this guy.

That guys seriously wins a ton of cred. To keep his cool and want to stay on message while getting bombed straight to fark is impressive.

Also, absolutely nobody believes that the Israelis are going to not hurt any civilians. That's ridiculous. I'd go so far as to say they're not intentionally targeting major civilian targets, sure, they're not monsters. But they're bombing the place - they're gonna get civilians.


And certain people are going to defend Israel for using what those same people have been criticizing Obama for using: drone strikes.
 
2012-11-17 05:53:49 AM

IlGreven: LasersHurt: sophus_tree:
And certain people are going to defend Israel for using what those same people have been criticizing Obama for using: drone strikes.


And the reverse will be true, too
 
2012-11-17 06:24:26 AM
Israel destroyed the Gaza Netflix distribution center.
 
2012-11-17 06:44:27 AM

DeltaPunch: bulldg4life: DeltaPunch: As aside, who was that incredibly hot news anchor?!? My god she's gorgeous...

Isha Sesay.

And, yes, she is gorgeous.

Gracias... off to teh googles...


2.bp.blogspot.com?
IT'S LESS LIKELY THAN YOU THINK
 
2012-11-17 06:47:48 AM

MmmmBacon: Too bad this is actually a proxy war


This.
As an oppressed group of people, it would make sense to stockpile some weapons for self defense. But when you're hiding thousands of unguided rockets and lobbing them at random into a city (and at oddly inconvenient times for western interests in the region) you can't expect anything less than a swift and violent response from the other side.

The Palestinians might be desperate for peace, but Hamas and the like aren't working for their interests.
 
2012-11-17 06:54:01 AM
Gazans should move to Beverly Hills.
 
2012-11-17 07:22:40 AM

BalugaJoe: Gazans should move to Beverly Hills.


LOL, and the White House too. They'd be welcomed with open arms in both places.
 
2012-11-17 09:04:35 AM

shotglasss: BalugaJoe: Gazans should move to Beverly Hills.

LOL, and the White House too. They'd be welcomed with open arms in both places.


I think it would be a lot more fun to relocate them to the deep South, and make sure they have funding available to build large, prominent mosques everywhere they settle.
For teh lulz!
 
2012-11-17 10:38:40 AM

LewDux: DeltaPunch: bulldg4life: DeltaPunch: As aside, who was that incredibly hot news anchor?!? My god she's gorgeous...

Isha Sesay.

And, yes, she is gorgeous.

Gracias... off to teh googles...

[2.bp.blogspot.com image 400x288]?
IT'S LESS LIKELY THAN YOU THINK


Really? Have you ever been exposed to the dreaded 'coco-sante'? Trust me it is NOT a myth. 

/but then again my sense of smell is so acute I can smell rattlesnakes
 
Displayed 50 of 275 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report