Originally posted by: TruePaige
What points did I not address?
Every point in my post but one, the Lebanon invasion. Want them repeated and bolded?
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Craig234
[
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Israel is the hope of the middle east, and they have shown a beautiful will, a noble resolve, and a love for Palestinians' land so great that not even the largest terrorist groups of all can bring them down.
Fixed.
How ironic that the "hope of the Middle East" destroys hope for millions of other Middle Easterners, the Palestinians and sometimes others.
How ironic it is that in the name of opposing "terrorists", it provided help to build Hamas, for the purpose of harming the PLO so it could more effectively harm the Palestinians.
Apparently acts such as invading Lebanon were
"noble" and 'beautiful".
The worst regimes in history had similar flowery phrases used for their policies, as well.
There are ways in which Israel has great qualities, and ways in which it shines over its neighbors, but you err with your rose colored glasses not noticing the very ugly parts.
I also showed that Israel was provoked into conflict by terrorist actions.
You clearly did not understand my comment about the one-sidedness of your comments.
For 20 years I've used the Hatfields and McCoys' feud to illustrate the fallacy you commit, the way that you can always justify the next killing - 'but they killed Billy Joe!'
It's not easy to help someone who has become terribly one-sided in their views to break out of the paradigms thay help them 'make sense' of the conflict. There's something powerful and seductive about the Manichean view to assign one side evil and one side good and then to call for Holy War to right the wrong until good wins. It's also an extremely common syndrome in the most unjust wars.
"Power tends to corrupt..." may be the four most important words ever written on politics.
It describes how, as humanity splits from an identity as a human race into identities as groups, powerful groups can abuse other groups and yet see themselves as the victims.
We saw in the United States one day of terrorism leading to a large scale war on terror.
This is a highly propagandistic statement; the fact that it's not obvious that it is, is part of why it is.
It tries to use one thing, and extract general qualities about it, clean them up a bit and stripn them of qualifying attributes, and use it to justify another.
It's a little like trying to justify the violent overthrow of the US government today by some splinter group by citing the American Revolution - easy, but flawed.
Imagine living in a nation where you could die any day from militant Palestinians trying to destroy your nation.
I'm going to ask you a question in what I suspect is a futile attempt to help you get past your myopia:
Simply, would you let the terribly oppressed population of Israel trade places - land, wealth, power - with the Palestinians? If not, perhaps there's more than your post.
Unlike the U.S., Israel knows exactly who to attack and how to stop the attacks on it.
The only way for Israel to succeed with its current approach is to commit genocide against the Palestinians or to increase the tyrannical rule over them to such even further extremes as to establish their 'security' much the way (to use some hyperbole) that the US has established its security from people in th Supermax prisons. Israel has assassinated 'enemy leader and forces' and many others for decades without achieving what you say they know how to achieve.
Simply put, you are locked into a one-sided, imbalanced view of the conflict which leaves you with no options but an unjust one in which one side defeats the other.
Facebook
Twitter