Nonviolence vs. Islamic Terrorism

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

When you compare predominantly Christian societies with predominantly Muslim societies, there is an extreme difference of the amount of tolerance. By the way, Jesus is part of Islam.



And why not?

Because there will never be an end to this until the Palestinains are given their own state. Some people just can't get along. Some peoples have been feuding for thousands of years it's just the way things are. Man is inherintly evil, selfish, and lustful of power, it's just the way things are.

 

[ddoyle00]

"The Peace Corps was founded in 1961 as a way to fight communism in the third world. Each member was an "ambassador of freedom" representing America. I believe the Peace Corps to be a vital tool in the nonviolent campaign against the hatred of the Islamic world."

I agree. Let the Peace Corp take a few rounds or a few car bombs and give the soldiers a break. Really, the way things are now, you would see members of the Peace Corp lined up and executed on TV.

"If a country needs aid, give it to them. Offer more than money. Offer food. Offer feet on the ground."

Sure, even if they continue developing nuclear weapons or chemical/biological weapons. Even if they continue taking our aid and using it as leverage against their own people. Keep giving it to them.

"Bin Laden's letter to America: Respond to it. Any propaganda at all: Respond to it. To beat the lies of an enemy you must clarify the problem and then ask his people to choose."

Giving that madman any kind of a voice would be a bad idea. The U.S. does not want to recognize him via the media for the same reason they didnt want to play the tapes of the Unabomber. It gives them credibility and builds their reputation. We dont need any more Muslims joining his cause because he got the U.S. to play his tapes.

 

[Tashah]

The Vatican City, what's there for a Jew, a Muslim? Mecca, what's there for a Jew, a Christian? Jerusalem has roots to all of these religions.

The 'roots' of Christianity and Islam per Jerusalem are extrememly tenuous at best.

The original name of this ancient city which dates to 3000 BCE was Urusalim, a Semitic word which means 'Fondation of God'. The city of Urusalim was captured in 1000 BCE by King David, and he renamed the city Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) which in Hebrew means 'City of Peace'.

According to the New Testament, Jesus of Nazareth (a Jew) visited the city of Jerusalem twice in his lifetime. According to the Qu'ran, Mohammad claimed to have visited Jerusalem once in a dream. Neither the Christian nor Islamic faiths can honestly posit a legitimate religious claim to the City of David.

Not at all, but less power I do think equates to less responsibility.

Indeed? There is a sliding-scale of morality? There are different issues of the proverbial moral compass? Was Höss less culpable than Hitler and Himmler? Please, enlighten me here.

I don't know that it is, but I do know for fact that it is not morally justifiable to kill in order to soothe their fears, especially when doing so would only strengthen their own fears and the fears of others.

It is however, morally justifiable to strike back in defense. Every codex of international law from antiquity to modernity recognizes this justification.

I do not think that Israel has kicked anything shut either, but when Hamas prooves that it hatred has destroyed all of their braincells, Israel should persevere rather than going back to punishing all of Palestine for the actions of terrorists.

Once again you are placing the behavioral onus on Israel. Is it not the responsibility of any soverign state to control its own citizens? Do Israeli citizens fire rockets into Gaza? Would the US government allow dissident Texans to continually fire rockets into Mexico?

Why doesn't the PA simply outlaw Hamas and Hizb'allah and disarm them? Wouldn't this be the prudent thing to immediately do? Ah, but the PA can't actually accomplish that mission... as that may lead to a Palestinian civil war. This honesty in deductive reasoning implies that there is no established rule of law or overarching governing body in Palestine. If this is so... then how can it ever function properly and be recognized as a viable soverign state? You can't have it both ways G>B. Either Palestine is a soverign state responsible for all actions within its borders, or it is a lawless no-mans land contested by various armed Palestinian factions. If it is the former, then the PA must be held accountable for Palestinian attacks upon Israel. If it is the latter, then Israel has the right to defend its citizens and impose military buffer zones.

 

[Tashah]

Dude it's my freaking term paper do you think I don't know how to cite my resources, anyways it's posted on the history section.

Along with misspelling my name, you also misplace my gender. Dudette perhaps, but certainly not dude. I sincerely hope your term paper is not as sloppy.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

The 'roots' of Christianity and Islam per Jerusalem are extrememly tenuous at best.

The original name of this ancient city which dates to 3000 BCE was Urusalim, a Semitic word which means 'Fondation of God'. The city of Urusalim was captured in 1000 BCE by King David, and he renamed the city Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) which in Hebrew means 'City of Peace'.

According to the New Testament, Jesus of Nazareth (a Jew) visited the city of Jerusalem twice in his lifetime. According to the Qu'ran, Mohammad claimed to have visited Jerusalem once in a dream. Neither the Christian nor Islamic faiths can honestly posit a legitimate religious claim to the City of David.

If Jesus were the only representative of Christianity, and Muhammad the only representative of Islam, that would be correct, but as far as I know the prophets of Judaism are prophets of Christianity, and Islam recognizes many of them, though not all.

Indeed? There is a sliding-scale of morality? There are different issues of the proverbial moral compass? Was Höss less culpable than Hitler and Himmler? Please, enlighten me here.

I would say that Israel has more power to change things than perhaps Palestine does.

It is however, morally justifiable to strike back in defense. Every codex of international law from antiquity to modernity recognizes this justification.

I do not.

Once again you are placing the behavioral onus on Israel. Is it not the responsibility of any soverign state to control its own citizens? Do Israeli citizens fire rockets into Gaza? Would the US government allow dissident Texans to continually fire rockets into Mexico?

What is the treatment of Mexico towards Texans like in this hypothetical situation?

Why doesn't the PA simply outlaw Hamas and Hizb'allah and disarm them? Wouldn't this be the prudent thing to immediately do? Ah, but the PA can't actually accomplish that mission... as that may lead to a Palestinian civil war. This honesty in deductive reasoning implies that there is no established rule of law or overarching governing body in Palestine. If this is so... then how can it ever function properly and be recognized as a viable soverign state? You can't have it both ways G>B. Either Palestine is a soverign state responsible for all actions within its borders, or it is a lawless no-mans land contested by various armed Palestinian factions. If it is the former, then the PA must be held accountable for Palestinian attacks upon Israel. If it is the latter, then Israel has the right to defend its citizens and impose military buffer zones.

If it were I Mr. Sharon's shoes, there would not be a day that I was not speaking Mr. Abbas. There must be communication between those two men so that there is communication between Israelis and Palestinians.

I do wholeheartedly believe that the PA, if it truly wants peace, it should condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as they are only an obstruction to that desire, but if it is found that the Palestinian Authority is unreasonable, then efforts must be aimed simply at the Palestinians.

 

[DivineComedy]

I do wholeheartedly believe that the PA, if it truly wants peace, it should condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as they are only an obstruction to that desire, but if it is found that the Palestinian Authority is unreasonable, then efforts must be aimed simply at the Palestinians.

You basically say the Palestinian Authority “should condemn Hamas and Hezbollah…but if it is found that the Palestinian Authority is unreasonable, then efforts must be aimed simply at the Palestinians.”

Mr. Non-violence can’t be talking about an “applied force” so are you going to throw words at them, or do some mentally effective evil eye when their bomber is about to enter the bus?

You might have actually been able to prevent a WAR, but you did not do anything to stop it, so what is your excuse?

“March 5, 2003: Bus bombing in Haifa. U.S. citizens killed: Abigail Leitel, 14, who was born in Lebanon, New Hampshire.” http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/usvictims.html

“The suicide bomber was 20 years old, a student of the Hebron Polytechnic University (from which a large number of suicide bombers have emerged) and a member of the Hamas terrorist organization.” http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/861590/posts

March 13, 2003: “(CBS) Saddam Hussein has distributed $260,000 to 26 families of Palestinians killed in 29 months of fighting with Israel, including a $10,000 check to the family of a Hamas suicide bomber.

In a packed banquet hall on Wednesday, the families came one-by-one to receive their $10,000 checks. A large banner said: ‘The Arab Baath Party Welcomes the Families of the Martyrs for the Distribution of Blessings of Saddam Hussein.’“ http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/14/world/main543981.shtml

“Recalling that in its resolution 687 (1991) the Council declared that a ceasefire would be based on acceptance by Iraq of the provisions of that resolution, including the obligations on Iraq contained therein,” http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/11/08/resolution.text/

“H
32. Requires Iraq to inform the Security Council that it will not commit or support any act of international terrorism or allow any organization directed towards commission of such acts to operate within its territory and to condemn unequivocally and renounce all acts, methods and practices of terrorism;
I
33. Declares that, upon official notification by Iraq to the Secretary-General and to the Security Council of its acceptance of the provisions above, a formal cease-fire is effective between Iraq and Kuwait and the Member States cooperating with Kuwait in accordance with resolution 678 (1990);” http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm

March 17, 2003: “The regime has a history of reckless aggression in the Middle East. It has a deep hatred of America and our friends. And it has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html

 

[Tashah]

If Jesus were the only representative of Christianity, and Muhammad the only representative of Islam, that would be correct, but as far as I know the prophets of Judaism are prophets of Christianity, and Islam recognizes many of them, though not all.

So? The liberal borrowing of Jewish prophets somehow translates into a religious-sweat-equity stake in Jerusalem? How is it that Christians and Muslims can claim religious 'roots' to a capital city that has had a Hebrew name since 1000 BCE? Even the last Temple-Mount of Herod well predates both Christianity and Islam. Why should the ancient mother be subserviant to the fledging daughters? Please, let's be real.

I would say that Israel has more power to change things than perhaps Palestine does.

Power? Or did you perhaps mean force? What 'power' should Israel levy to sway Palestine? Financial power? Should we bribe them into peace? Educational power? Should Israel educate all Palestinian children? Technological power? Perhaps build them a few nukes? Agricultural power? Maybe we can till their neglected soil? Power of the press? Transfer Ha'Aretz to Gaza and The Jerusalem Post to the West Bank? International power? Israeli diplomats always vote against Israel at the UN? What in the world are you talking about?

What is the treatment of Mexico towards Texans like in this hypothetical situation?

Don't be coy. Once again you are searching for a Palestinian loophole. Gandhi>Bush... soverign nations simply do not tolerate rocket attacks or suicide bombings on a neighboring state that emanate from within their territory. Why can't you understand and appreciate this basic truism?

If it were I Mr. Sharon's shoes, there would not be a day that I was not speaking Mr. Abbas. There must be communication between those two men so that there is communication between Israelis and Palestinians.

If I were in Mr. Sharon's shoes, I would likewise not tolerate the murder of Israeli civilians. If I were in the shoes of Mr. Abbas, I would not let a single day pass without publically demanding an immediate end to all Palestinian attacks upon Israel.

I do wholeheartedly believe that the PA, if it truly wants peace, it should condemn Hamas and Hezbollah as they are only an obstruction to that desire, but if it is found that the Palestinian Authority is unreasonable, then efforts must be aimed simply at the Palestinians.

Efforts? What efforts? The triad above comprises the Palestinian leadership cadre. They are all being unreasonable. What efforts? Do you think Palestinians possess an alternative political outlet similiar to the populist Solidarity movement of communist Poland? What efforts? Destabilize Palestine? Would a Palestinian civil war serve the best interests of Israel? Is an Iraqi civil war serving the best interests of America?

What efforts? You're a liberal... wouldn't this be considered as Israel meddling in the affairs of another soverign state? How dare we!

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

So? The liberal borrowing of Jewish prophets somehow translates into a religious-sweat-equity stake in Jerusalem? How is it that Christians and Muslims can claim religious 'roots' to a capital city that has had a Hebrew name since 1000 BCE? Even the last Temple-Mount of Herod well predates both Christianity and Islam. Why should the ancient mother be subserviant to the fledging daughters? Please, let's be real.


Power? Or did you perhaps mean force? What 'power' should Israel levy to sway Palestine? Financial power? Should we bribe them into peace? Educational power? Should Israel educate all Palestinian children? Technological power? Perhaps build them a few nukes? Agricultural power? Maybe we can till their neglected soil? Power of the press? Transfer Ha'Aretz to Gaza and The Jerusalem Post to the West Bank? International power? Israeli diplomats always vote against Israel at the UN? What in the world are you talking about?


Don't be coy. Once again you are searching for a Palestinian loophole. Gandhi>Bush... soverign nations simply do not tolerate rocket attacks or suicide bombings on a neighboring state that emanate from within their territory. Why can't you understand and appreciate this basic truism?


If I were in Mr. Sharon's shoes, I would likewise not tolerate the murder of Israeli civilians. If I were in the shoes of Mr. Abbas, I would not let a single day pass without publically demanding an immediate end to all Palestinian attacks upon Israel.


Efforts? What efforts? The triad above comprises the Palestinian leadership cadre. They are all being unreasonable. What efforts? Do you think Palestinians possess an alternative political outlet similiar to the populist Solidarity movement of communist Poland? What efforts? Destabilize Palestine? Would a Palestinian civil war serve the best interests of Israel? Is an Iraqi civil war serving the best interests of America?

What efforts? You're a liberal... wouldn't this be considered as Israel meddling in the affairs of another soverign state? How dare we!

In actuality interventionalism is a very liberal policy, traditional conservatives tend to lean more towards the realist philosophy of state sovereignty, while liberals tend to lean more towards interventionalism.

 

[George_Washington]

The 'roots' of Christianity and Islam per Jerusalem are extrememly tenuous at best.

The original name of this ancient city which dates to 3000 BCE was Urusalim, a Semitic word which means 'Fondation of God'. The city of Urusalim was captured in 1000 BCE by King David, and he renamed the city Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) which in Hebrew means 'City of Peace'.

According to the New Testament, Jesus of Nazareth (a Jew) visited the city of Jerusalem twice in his lifetime. According to the Qu'ran, Mohammad claimed to have visited Jerusalem once in a dream. Neither the Christian nor Islamic faiths can honestly posit a legitimate religious claim to the City of David.

Ok but Tashah, come on. Israel, Christianity, and the Muslim faith are all connected. The Vatican is the center for Roman Catholicism but not for other kinds of Christian sects such as Protestanism. I'm not saying that I don't support Israel as a state but I think it's inaccurate to say that Israel isn't an important land for both Christians and Muslims. Maybe Jerusalem isn't in itself but many areas of Israel hold heart felt compassion for them. As long as Israel allows religious freedom, than I will support it.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

You basically say the Palestinian Authority “should condemn Hamas and Hezbollah…but if it is found that the Palestinian Authority is unreasonable, then efforts must be aimed simply at the Palestinians.”

Mr. Non-violence can’t be talking about an “applied force” so are you going to throw words at them, or do some mentally effective evil eye when their bomber is about to enter the bus?

You might have actually been able to prevent a WAR, but you did not do anything to stop it, so what is your excuse?

“March 5, 2003: Bus bombing in Haifa. U.S. citizens killed: Abigail Leitel, 14, who was born in Lebanon, New Hampshire.” http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/usvictims.html

“The suicide bomber was 20 years old, a student of the Hebron Polytechnic University (from which a large number of suicide bombers have emerged) and a member of the Hamas terrorist organization.” http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/861590/posts

March 13, 2003: “(CBS) Saddam Hussein has distributed $260,000 to 26 families of Palestinians killed in 29 months of fighting with Israel, including a $10,000 check to the family of a Hamas suicide bomber.

In a packed banquet hall on Wednesday, the families came one-by-one to receive their $10,000 checks. A large banner said: ‘The Arab Baath Party Welcomes the Families of the Martyrs for the Distribution of Blessings of Saddam Hussein.’“ http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/14/world/main543981.shtml

“Recalling that in its resolution 687 (1991) the Council declared that a ceasefire would be based on acceptance by Iraq of the provisions of that resolution, including the obligations on Iraq contained therein,” http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/11/08/resolution.text/

“H
32. Requires Iraq to inform the Security Council that it will not commit or support any act of international terrorism or allow any organization directed towards commission of such acts to operate within its territory and to condemn unequivocally and renounce all acts, methods and practices of terrorism;
I
33. Declares that, upon official notification by Iraq to the Secretary-General and to the Security Council of its acceptance of the provisions above, a formal cease-fire is effective between Iraq and Kuwait and the Member States cooperating with Kuwait in accordance with resolution 678 (1990);” http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm

March 17, 2003: “The regime has a history of reckless aggression in the Middle East. It has a deep hatred of America and our friends. And it has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda.”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030317-7.html

Could you clarify? I'm missing your thesis.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

So? The liberal borrowing of Jewish prophets somehow translates into a religious-sweat-equity stake in Jerusalem? How is it that Christians and Muslims can claim religious 'roots' to a capital city that has had a Hebrew name since 1000 BCE? Even the last Temple-Mount of Herod well predates both Christianity and Islam. Why should the ancient mother be subserviant to the fledging daughters? Please, let's be real.

Borrowing? Chistianity is an extension of Judaism. Islam is an extension of Christianity. No one is borrowing anything. Abraham is the father of Jews, Christians and Muslims alike. No one is borrowing that.

Power? Or did you perhaps mean force? What 'power' should Israel levy to sway Palestine? Financial power? Should we bribe them into peace? Educational power? Should Israel educate all Palestinian children? Technological power? Perhaps build them a few nukes? Agricultural power? Maybe we can till their neglected soil? Power of the press? Transfer Ha'Aretz to Gaza and The Jerusalem Post to the West Bank? International power? Israeli diplomats always vote against Israel at the UN? What in the world are you talking about?

It has all of these powers over Palestine. I don't recommend bribes, I recommend aid where aid is needed. Israel should educate Palestinian children if they so want to be educated. Technology: No one should have nukes, but I do think that helping them develop in various fields couldn't hurt. Till their soil if they need it done. Seems kind of Peace Corps-ish so I'm all for it. Give them press if that is what they need, if that is what they want. As for international power they should work for things that would benefit both Israel and Palestine. The answer is again unity. I understand that not all of this can be done. Do what you can and do it well.

Don't be coy. Once again you are searching for a Palestinian loophole. Gandhi>Bush... soverign nations simply do not tolerate rocket attacks or suicide bombings on a neighboring state that emanate from within their territory. Why can't you understand and appreciate this basic truism?

Invading and punishing isn't going to solve such problems. What don't you understand and appreciate about that? You want to stop bombs from going off, missles from being launced? First, you must stop your own.

If I were in Mr. Sharon's shoes, I would likewise not tolerate the murder of Israeli civilians. If I were in the shoes of Mr. Abbas, I would not let a single day pass without publically demanding an immediate end to all Palestinian attacks upon Israel.

Agreed.

 

[Tashah]

Borrowing? Chistianity is an extension of Judaism. Islam is an extension of Christianity. No one is borrowing anything. Abraham is the father of Jews, Christians and Muslims alike. No one is borrowing that.

Both Christianity (New Testament et. al.) and Islam (Qu'ran) have 'borrowed' liberally and deeply from Judaic scripture. Any reasonably competent first-year theological/seminary/rabbinical student would stipulate that.

Invading and punishing isn't going to solve such problems. What don't you understand and appreciate about that? You want to stop bombs from going off, missles from being launced? First, you must stop your own.

Invade? It is you who conveniently forgets that Israel was invaded by Arab armies the day after it came into existence and has been invaded numerous times since. What don't you understand and appreciate about that? Two days after Israel pulled out of Gaza, Qassam rockets were landing in nearby Israeli towns. Why can't you understand and appreciate that G>B? How do you justify that to the families of the Israeli dead and wounded Gandhi>Bush? You sit in your peaceful little ivory tower and pound your little bully pulpit demanding nirvana in a place far removed from your corporeal experience and understanding. Extraordinary.

You titled this thread 'Nonviolence vs. Islamic Terrorism'. So far, I have not seen any honest attempt on your part to address your topic. Since page one you have almost exclusively dedicated this thread to Israel bashing. You have not once mentioned al-Qa'ida, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hizb'allah, Islamic Jihad, Ansar al-Islam, Jemaah Islamiyah, al-Aksa, al-Zarqawi, or the Palestinian Authority in a negative light. Once again... extraordinary. As long as you see fit to continue this farce, I will be here. Day for day, post for post, word for word.

 

[DivineComedy]

Could you clarify? I'm missing your thesis.

No, I will let someone else shove it down your throat with a stick. That is why we are at war.

 

[FinnMacCool]

Invade? It is you who conveniently forgets that Israel was invaded by Arab armies the day after it came into existence and has been invaded numerous times since. What don't you understand and appreciate about that? Two days after Israel pulled out of Gaza, Qassam rockets were landing in nearby Israeli towns. Why can't you understand and appreciate that G>B? How do you justify that to the families of the Israeli dead and wounded Gandhi>Bush? You sit in your peaceful little ivory tower and pound your little bully pulpit demanding nirvana in a place far removed from your corporeal experience and understanding. Extraordinary.

You completely miss the point here. And that blatant attack on Ghand, in my opinion, is uncalled for.

You titled this thread 'Nonviolence vs. Islamic Terrorism'. So far, I have not seen any honest attempt on your part to address your topic. Since page one you have almost exclusively dedicated this thread to Israel bashing.

Am I reading the same thread as you? It seems to me that G>B has been extremely civil, though you have sometimes lashed out at him several times, undeservedly.

You have not once mentioned al-Qa'ida, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hizb'allah, Islamic Jihad, Ansar al-Islam, Jemaah Islamiyah, al-Aksa, al-Zarqawi, or the Palestinian Authority in a negative light.

Then maybe this thread isn't you? Haven't we already seen enough of that? It seems to me G>B is simply saying that we should better understand our enemies and try to work to peaceful solutions.

Oh yes and obviously I know this wasn't directed at me or anyone else besides Ghan but, as I am able to see it as well as anyone else in this forum, I had to say something.

 

[FinnMacCool]

G>B, if non violence could work against Islamic extremists I would use it. However in my opinion, if you look at the immediate, someone who has already been shaped and formed into an absurdly nationalistic person who would be willing to strap a bomb on their chest for their country, religion etc. there is nothing you can really do about that now.

Look if someone is angry, it is impossible to reason with them, is it not? Its only when they are calmed down that you can talk sense into them. But if they try and attack you, should you not hit back for your own protection? I think that we should deal with Islamic fundamentalism the same way. But once they are down and still aching from their wounds, THAT is the time to step in and try to make ammends. But to do so when they are angry is simply not very profitable.

However, I think we need to look to the future. Peace is not possible in our lifetime since these people have already been shaped to hate each other. I think though that if we try to understand argumets from both sides and

Btw G>B, I have followed your debate with Tashah since the beginning and I must say that your thinking is extremely enlightening. I still am skeptical but I think if there were more people in the world like you, we could have world peace in less then 20 years.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

Both Christianity (New Testament et. al.) and Islam (Qu'ran) have 'borrowed' liberally and deeply from Judaic scripture. Any reasonably competent first-year theological/seminary/rabbinical student would stipulate that.

The "Old Testament" belongs to both Jews and Christians. There is patent on the old testament that reserves it specifically for Jews

Invade? It is you who conveniently forgets that Israel was invaded by Arab armies the day after it came into existence and has been invaded numerous times since. What don't you understand and appreciate about that? Two days after Israel pulled out of Gaza, Qassam rockets were landing in nearby Israeli towns. Why can't you understand and appreciate that G>B? How do you justify that to the families of the Israeli dead and wounded Gandhi>Bush? You sit in your peaceful little ivory tower and pound your little bully pulpit demanding nirvana in a place far removed from your corporeal experience and understanding. Extraordinary.

I understand the history of this matter, what I don't understand is how Israel can use the same strategy for fifty some odd years and become so aggravated at why the problem isn't going away. Instead of beating your enemy until he recognizes a superior, make him your equal. That is my position.

You titled this thread 'Nonviolence vs. Islamic Terrorism'. So far, I have not seen any honest attempt on your part to address your topic. Since page one you have almost exclusively dedicated this thread to Israel bashing.

In my opening post, the word Israel did was not present. Merely, "Free Palestine". That's it. When my position was challenged, I defended it. I do not mean for my stance to be anti-Israel. My stance is anti-Israel's stance. Much like my anti-America's stance: it doesn't mean I'm not a proud citizen of my country.

You have not once mentioned al-Qa'ida, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Hizb'allah, Islamic Jihad, Ansar al-Islam, Jemaah Islamiyah, al-Aksa, al-Zarqawi, or the Palestinian Authority in a negative light. Once again... extraordinary.

I do not see the problem as these various terrorist organizations. I don't see the problem as bin Laden or al-Zarqawi. The threat in this situation is not a country, or a religion, or a people, or even a person. The problem is hatred, and if you want to solve that problem you're going to have to think.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

No, I will let someone else shove it down your throat with a stick. That is why we are at war.

How colorful.

I really would like to understand your point so that you may in the very least understand my own.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

G>B, if non violence could work against Islamic extremists I would use it. However in my opinion, if you look at the immediate, someone who has already been shaped and formed into an absurdly nationalistic person who would be willing to strap a bomb on their chest for their country, religion etc. there is nothing you can really do about that now.

You must do something about it now. If you wait too long, he will kill people.

Look if someone is angry, it is impossible to reason with them, is it not?

Not necessarily. Anger is easy. While I've encountered hate and frustration, I have not encountered it to the extremes that we see in the Middle East. There are things that I hate, but there is nothing that I hate so much that I want to see it come to harm.

Its only when they are calmed down that you can talk sense into them. But if they try and attack you, should you not hit back for your own protection? I think that we should deal with Islamic fundamentalism the same way. But once they are down and still aching from their wounds, THAT is the time to step in and try to make ammends. But to do so when they are angry is simply not very profitable.

First of all, forget profit. In the hypothetical situation you mentioned, I really would not hit back for my own protection. I don't know if you've ever had the oppritunity to take a punch and then refuse to strike back, but when you do it you can see the confusion on people's faces.

However, I think we need to look to the future. Peace is not possible in our lifetime since these people have already been shaped to hate each other. I think though that if we try to understand argumets from both sides and

I'm not sure what you were about to say, but to the first part I think regardless of these people's "shape," they can't be allowed to stay there and stagnate or worse be aggravated more.

 

[George_Washington]

Both Christianity (New Testament et. al.) and Islam (Qu'ran) have 'borrowed' liberally and deeply from Judaic scripture. Any reasonably competent first-year theological/seminary/rabbinical student would stipulate that.

Well, maybe what you said could be put in a different manner... Christianity and Islam are more like, "continuations" of the Jewish faith. We've borrowed in a certain sense of the word but I think it would be more accurate to say that we "built" on Judaism. You know? Although I'll be honest and tell you that there a lot of things about the Muslim faith that I don't appreciate or agree with...

Regardless of how anyone feels about Israel, I think the worst thing they could have done was give up the Gaza strip to the arabs. I fear that will inevitably lead to the annihiliation of the state of Israel because I think the arabs will, sadly, look at that as an invitation to keep attacking Israel.

G>B, I don't want to see either group be displaced, harrassed or whatever but I think one thing you're not considering is that Israel is much more of a tolerant and peaceful country within its borders than many of the arab nations. I don't think the Jews descriminate towards other religions as much as the arabs do. Look at most of the arab countries; they are very far from being democracies and many descriminate against Christians. I don't see a lot of Jews descriminating against Christians in the middle east like the arabs do.

G>B, your assertion that the arab countries were peaceful and all until the Jews came in was totally false. Arabs have just as much a history of violence and conquest as Europeans do. Take a look at the arab countries! None of them allow freedom of religion or speech and they treat their women horribly. They make them cover themselves up and they just treat women like they are dogs. They're backward in their thinking and the Saudi Royal Family are nothing but pompous dictators.

When have you heard of Israel treating their women as such? When has Israel beeen so backward in their thinking?

They haven't been. Israel seems to value knowledge and democracy much more so than the arabs do. If I were living in the middle east I would feel much safer in Israel than I would in most of the arab countries. At least nowadays.

And G>B also, consider that Israel did, in fact, compromise by giving up the Gaza Strip. Don't they deserve some credit for that?

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

G>B, I don't want to see either group be displaced, harrassed or whatever but I think one thing you're not considering is that Israel is much more of a tolerant and peaceful country within its borders than many of the arab nations. I don't think the Jews descriminate towards other religions as much as the arabs do. Look at most of the arab countries; they are very far from being democracies and many descriminate against Christians. I don't see a lot of Jews descriminating against Christians in the middle east like the arabs do.

Israel is much more tolerant, yes. I won't argue with that.

G>B, your assertion that the arab countries were peaceful and all until the Jews came in was totally false.

I don't recall making such an assertion.

When have you heard of Israel treating their women as such? When has Israel beeen so backward in their thinking?

A long time ago, I'm sure. Christianity and Judaism are just as anti-women as Islam.

They haven't been. Israel seems to value knowledge and democracy much more so than the arabs do. If I were living in the middle east I would feel much safer in Israel than I would in most of the arab countries. At least nowadays.

I think the reason that Israel is more tolerant is that they're more diverse.

And G>B also, consider that Israel did, in fact, compromise by giving up the Gaza Strip. Don't they deserve some credit for that?

Sure they do. And if they stay the course and keep making efforts for peace, they might see the end of this soon.

 

[George_Washington]

I don't recall making such an assertion.

I thought that's what you were implying but if you weren't, than I apologize. I don't have time right now to scroll back through this thread but I recall you mentioned something about the arab world being more into science and math before Israel was founded. But if you meant something else, than I do apologize.

A long time ago, I'm sure. Christianity and Judaism are just as anti-women as Islam.

Not true, at least not nowadays. Practically every Christian country treats their women well. We at least treat women much better than many places in Asia and Africa.

I think the reason that Israel is more tolerant is that they're more diverse.

That could be part of it but there again, that just shows how much more modern Israel is than the arab counterparts.

Sure they do. And if they stay the course and keep making efforts for peace, they might see the end of this soon.

You just don't understand how the arabs think. The ones that vehemently hate the Jews won't stop terrorizing them until they are all dead or at least Israel is dismantled. It's the same kind of hatred towards them as it is us; no matter what the US would do, the Muslim extremists would continue to hate us based on the fact that we're not Muslim and we're not very religious and spiritual in their eyes. The worst thing the US or Israel could do right now is compromise by giving the arabs our lands, resources, etc. because that will just make them want more. Unfortunately, I do believe Israel was very wrong in handing over the Gaza Strip, at least as far as their preservation is concerned.

 

[Tashah]

The "Old Testament" belongs to both Jews and Christians. There is patent on the old testament that reserves it specifically for Jews

George Washington is right... Christianity and Islam have built themselves upon the scripture of Judaism. Do Jews have a patent on the Old Testament? No... unfortunately copyright law had yet to be invented. Did Christianity and Islam plagiarize the Old Testament? Certainly.

I understand the history of this matter, what I don't understand is how Israel can use the same strategy for fifty some odd years and become so aggravated at why the problem isn't going away. Instead of beating your enemy until he recognizes a superior, make him your equal. That is my position.

Flip your thinking. Why have the Arabs used the same strategy (invasions) for fifty years and are aggravated because the problem (Israel) remains? Your position of making the enemy an equal is nothing more than old-world appeasement dressed up in hippy bellbottoms. Perhaps you should brush up on Lord Halifax.

In my opening post, the word Israel did was not present. Merely, "Free Palestine". That's it. When my position was challenged, I defended it. I do not mean for my stance to be anti-Israel. My stance is anti-Israel's stance. Much like my anti-America's stance: it doesn't mean I'm not a proud citizen of my country.

Merely 'Free Palestine'? That phrase initiates a meaningful discourse on Islamic terrorism... your intended topic? Of course your anti-Israel position was challenged and it will continue to be challenged ad nauseum. You have your position and I have mine and arguing forever suits me just fine. I believe the apt Americana phrase is; 'I'll be here till the cows come home'.

I do not see the problem as these various terrorist organizations. I don't see the problem as bin Laden or al-Zarqawi. The threat in this situation is not a country, or a religion, or a people, or even a person. The problem is hatred, and if you want to solve that problem you're going to have to think.

Six million Jews perished due to the hate of Nazi ideology. Appeasement didn't serve to save them, nor did nonviolence deter Nazi hatred. It is actually you who should do some deep thinking.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

I thought that's what you were implying but if you weren't, than I apologize. I don't have time right now to scroll back through this thread but I recall you mentioned something about the arab world being more into science and math before Israel was founded. But if you meant something else, than I do apologize.

No, I don't recall saying that...

Not true, at least not nowadays. Practically every Christian country treats their women well. We at least treat women much better than many places in Asia and Africa.

Can you name one Christian theocracy? No. There is no such thing today. In addition, I did not say that Christians treat their women the same, I said Christianity. I don't think you could easily find a Christian church that treats their women as Paul said to treat them.

For instance women aren't allowed to speak in church, and in the even they have a question they are to wait until they get home and then ask their husbands. I don't think you would easily find a synagogue that maintained that women should leave their homes at the "unclean" time of the month. There is a reason that Christianity and Judaism have become so progressive and tolerant. It's because at some point they were forced to coexist with other cultures.

The Middle East was left alone until we decided we need oil and lots of it. Then it became incredibly convenient to be friends with these people. I'm not saying it's the western world's fault that these people were isolated for so long, but the UN partition plan certainly didn't help. Segregating Israel from Palestine, Jew from Muslim, is not going to soothe the hatred here. It's going to envigorate it, especially when they believe that the land has been taken from them. Again, I say the answer is unity.

That could be part of it but there again, that just shows how much more modern Israel is than the arab counterparts.

Israel is much more modernized and diverse because many of its citizens are but a single step away from immigrants, not that there is anything wrong with that.

You just don't understand how the arabs think.

And how is it you have come to know the psychology of every member of a single ethnic group?

The ones that vehemently hate the Jews won't stop terrorizing them until they are all dead or at least Israel is dismantled. It's the same kind of hatred towards them as it is us; no matter what the US would do, the Muslim extremists would continue to hate us based on the fact that we're not Muslim and we're not very religious and spiritual in their eyes.

If we fought this fight in the correct way, it would be very very few that hated America of Israel. They would be reduced to the status of people like Aryan Imperium, or a rickety old man with a Grand Dragon robe in his closet.

The worst thing the US or Israel could do right now is compromise by giving the arabs our lands, resources, etc. because that will just make them want more.

That's not comprimise. It's capitulation. I don't recommend that.

Unfortunately, I do believe Israel was very wrong in handing over the Gaza Strip, at least as far as their preservation is concerned.

Relinquishing the grip on Gaza as well as the control of the borders of Gaza makes it possible for nonviolent protests. People marching in demonstration rather than killing. If you don't think the Palestinians have a will for nonviolence, I have some links I could provide about the upcoming conference, and various organizations.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

George Washington is right... Christianity and Islam have built themselves upon the scripture of Judaism. Do Jews have a patent on the Old Testament? No... unfortunately copyright law had yet to be invented. Did Christianity and Islam plagiarize the Old Testament? Certainly.

I don't think you could call it plagiarism. If you want to get technical, they kind of all believe in the same God...

Flip your thinking. Why have the Arabs used the same strategy (invasions) for fifty years and are aggravated because the problem (Israel) remains?

Good point. So will you sit around waiting for them to change, refusing yourself to change, or will you beat them to it?

Your position of making the enemy an equal is nothing more than old-world appeasement dressed up in hippy bellbottoms.

I'm talking about nonviolence. Appeasement has nothing to do with it.

Merely 'Free Palestine'? That phrase initiates a meaningful discourse on Islamic terrorism... your intended topic?

I don't think that's what that phrase means at all. It simply means free Palestine.

Of course your anti-Israel position was challenged and it will continue to be challenged ad nauseum.

I'm not anti-Israel.

Six million Jews perished due to the hate of Nazi ideology. Appeasement didn't serve to save them, nor did nonviolence deter Nazi hatred. It is actually you who should do some deep thinking.

Who tried nonviolence on the Nazis?

Hatred wasn't destroyed during WWII was it? I don't have the report bookmarked, but I could find it again. It said that about 15% of the population of Germany in abotu 1998 is STILL anti-semetic. The only reason it's that low is because Germans were forced to live with Jews and to tolerate them. And that force still hasn't killed the anti-semitism.

 

[Tashah]

I don't think you could call it plagiarism. If you want to get technical, they kind of all believe in the same God...

If you want to get technical... they do not believe in the same God. There is no such deistic entity as the Trinity in either Judaism or Islam.

Good point. So will you sit around waiting for them to change, refusing yourself to change, or will you beat them to it?

As I have patiently explained, Israel has indeed changed and tried the moderate approach with the Gaza withdrawal. The reply from Palestine has been so disappointing from an Israeli pov that Sharon must now form his own moderate political party to survive. What does this mean? If Netanyahu can form a majority coalition... the Palestinians will highly regret letting a colossal opportunity for peace simply fritter away. I'm being quite honest with you. Israelis will no longer trade land for peace. We've been burned.

I don't think that's what that phrase means at all. It simply means free Palestine. I'm not anti-Israel.

Just as the United States cannot free the Iraqis, Israel cannot free the Palestinians. Both the Iraqis and Palestinians must decide for themselves the course of their respective destinies.

Who tried nonviolence on the Nazis? Hatred wasn't destroyed during WWII was it? I don't have the report bookmarked, but I could find it again. It said that about 15% of the population of Germany in abotu 1998 is STILL anti-semetic. The only reason it's that low is because Germans were forced to live with Jews and to tolerate them. And that force still hasn't killed the anti-semitism.

I beg to differ. I visit Germany every year and have many close German friendships. Most Germans born post WWII harbor no hatred or animosity for Jews or Israelis. The German population that IS anti-Semitic, are the now elderly remnant from the Third Reich and young hooligans. If you don't believe me on this... simply ask GarzaUK about modern Germans/Austrians and anti-Semitism.

I do not hate Palestinians. As a matter of fact, as time permits I am a volunteer English tutor to Palestinian children in the West Bank. I speak all three languages... and this is an Israeli reach-out program. My problem isn't with the Palestinian people per se, but with those who actively seek my demise and destruction.