-
This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
-
Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.
Palestinians = unworthy Islamofascists who hate everything to do with the West?
- Thread starter Makhno
- Start date
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 156,720
- Reaction score
- 53,497
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
It's nice to hear Palestinians speaking out against this. Is anyone doing anything to find out who took him or get him back? The news didn't say anything.
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2006
- Messages
- 40,783
- Reaction score
- 16,191
- Location
- Denmark
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Its not the first time Palestinians rally for the release of hostages and no one knows who took him or why. Most think its criminal elements wanting a quick buck.
- Joined
- May 19, 2006
- Messages
- 156,720
- Reaction score
- 53,497
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Everything I read points to rogue criminals trying to either get something from the Palestinian government or trying to undermine Palestinian interests. I have little trust of Hamas, but I hope what I've been reading, and the quote above is accurate.
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2005
- Messages
- 20,915
- Reaction score
- 546
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
It's a ploy, they want the journalists released because if they're not all journalists will stop going to Palestenian territories.
clone19
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2007
- Messages
- 73
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- America
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
yet another glimpse of the world we dont see. There is a large population of muslims who are for peace, not matter what the cost. Pride, land, material objects are nothing in comparison to peace, stability and security.
stop the violence. it doenst matter "who started it", or who has "claim" to it. We need to work it out, and we need a NEUTRAL force there to ensure justice. However, it seems "neutral" is a thing of the past.
stop the violence. it doenst matter "who started it", or who has "claim" to it. We need to work it out, and we need a NEUTRAL force there to ensure justice. However, it seems "neutral" is a thing of the past.
MickB
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2007
- Messages
- 243
- Reaction score
- 14
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
You can only be neutral if you don't care about the issues at stake. And people who couldn't give a monkeys are hardly likely to weigh in to solve world problems.
Even the League Of Nations wasn't neutral. Indeed, even letting Mussolini rape Abyssinia and Hitler take central Europe in a desperate bid to avoid confrontation is hardly the act of a sober and rational collective.
Trouble is that Islamic jihadic fervour flares up every few hundred years. The last time it happened the invading armies got as far as Vienna.
You can only judge a nation by its government. And if Palestine sanctions a culture which screams for annihilation of Jews and the brutal suppression of religious freedoms then people can hardly be blamed for feeling hostile.
Even the League Of Nations wasn't neutral. Indeed, even letting Mussolini rape Abyssinia and Hitler take central Europe in a desperate bid to avoid confrontation is hardly the act of a sober and rational collective.
Trouble is that Islamic jihadic fervour flares up every few hundred years. The last time it happened the invading armies got as far as Vienna.
You can only judge a nation by its government. And if Palestine sanctions a culture which screams for annihilation of Jews and the brutal suppression of religious freedoms then people can hardly be blamed for feeling hostile.
clone19
Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2007
- Messages
- 73
- Reaction score
- 4
- Location
- America
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
what are you talking about? it is very easy to be neutral. You hear both sides of the story, and take a position that does'nt oppose either side. It is very possible to be neutral and still care.
this is the most flawed statement i have heard from you yet, and that says quite a bit. It is very possible to judge a nation by factors other than it's government. Canadians generall hate Bush, and hate his administration. That doesn't mean they don't have respect for us as a country or as a people.
A better statement here would be "you can only judge a nation by it's laws", but laws are the reflection of the beliefs of the people running the governement, which in most cases represents about half of the population, which is still not a number large enough to be worthy of "judgement".
MickB
Banned
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2007
- Messages
- 243
- Reaction score
- 14
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
"it is very easy to be neutral. You hear both sides of the story, and take a position that does'nt oppose either side. It is very possible to be neutral and still care."
If you're an adjudicator who has no personal ties to the problem then it can be easy to sit above. That's why we all think we're so great at solving everyone's troubles. But as for the heavy world of geo-politics, I've rarely heard of any politician wanting to save something or further something without getting something out of it. Think of Suez, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Poland or Cuba. Even the 'eco' brigade want to kill two birds with one stone by raking in more taxes whilst trying to save the earth.
Or maybe I'm just too cynical these days.
"this is the most flawed statement i have heard from you yet, and that says quite a bit. " Oooo, sticks 'n' stones!
An extreme example of judging a nation by its government is how we dealt with the Nazis. That's not to forget the dissidents and refugees, but we had no option but to relate to Germany in regards to who was in charge. Foreign policy has the biggest impact on international relations (though, as you touch upon, it may not necessarily have much impact on cultural relations pitched on an individual level).
But, in the end, diplomatic relations depends more on relating to the government than to any number of the broad mass.
If you're an adjudicator who has no personal ties to the problem then it can be easy to sit above. That's why we all think we're so great at solving everyone's troubles. But as for the heavy world of geo-politics, I've rarely heard of any politician wanting to save something or further something without getting something out of it. Think of Suez, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Poland or Cuba. Even the 'eco' brigade want to kill two birds with one stone by raking in more taxes whilst trying to save the earth.
Or maybe I'm just too cynical these days.
"this is the most flawed statement i have heard from you yet, and that says quite a bit. " Oooo, sticks 'n' stones!
An extreme example of judging a nation by its government is how we dealt with the Nazis. That's not to forget the dissidents and refugees, but we had no option but to relate to Germany in regards to who was in charge. Foreign policy has the biggest impact on international relations (though, as you touch upon, it may not necessarily have much impact on cultural relations pitched on an individual level).
But, in the end, diplomatic relations depends more on relating to the government than to any number of the broad mass.