• 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!

Terminology 1

Status
Not open for further replies.

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Keeping with the theme as outlined in the " Terror Tunnels ? " thread we perhaps need to go a little deeper to see how perceptions are shaped by the use of the terminology

With regards to the " terror tunnels " into Israeli from Gaza it came about that a poster made the point that , even if they had not been used for ant terror attacks , their existence and the effect it had on Israeli civilians living near the border was enough to justify the term. I think that's what they meant to infer anyhow. No matter let's take it as a reasonable point

The tunnels engender fear in the Israeli border communities and as such the term " terror tunnel " is valid. Okay so let's leave that as the statement to work from

Moving on let's have the same thing applied to the Palestinian people , in an attempt at objective analysis. Wishing to apply the same standards to both parties

So what acts and/or actions do the Israeli side carry out that will engender fear in the Palestinian population under siege and/or occupation ? And if we identify them properly should we label the in the same way ? To me , if you seek to be objective there can only be one answer to that question ,

I would say the reality of the military occupation and/or siege the Palestinians live under would be sure to engender understandable fears amongst the Palestinians. So that should be included

The targeted assassination programme is sure to be included too. Living with drones buzzing overhead , not knowing if the car that passing you in the street is the intended target for a missile strike that may well kill you in the process

The frequent wide scale military attacks in which , every time , masses of innocents people are always killed would also make that list without any issue or controversy

The Gazan buffer zone too would see Palestinians justifiably scared of being shot for entering it to farm it or scavenge from it

The policy of administrative detention which sees people arrested , often at night , and taken away without charge or trial is sure to make it too

What about the presence of illegal Israeli settlers and the violence they engage in ?

If the list above is capable of engendering fears into Palestinian people , which is surely the case , then why aren't we wondering why they are not given the same treatment when it comes the terminology being used ?

Are Palestinian fears less important than Israeli fears ? They shouldn't be

At this point , or earlier , you might be wondering why is this a big deal ?

Well, to me if you class all actions by the Palestinians as terrorism and or seek to tack it on to this type of subject then the demonization taking place of the Palestinians is highly dangerous as we have seen before when a people are being dehumanized . It can see people grant themselves and get support for things , crimes and atrocities , that would never be allowed without it

In a recent thread a poster here circumvented their own definition of terrorism so as to label the children throwing stones as "terrorists" engaged in terrorism. You won't need me to tell you how chilling a precedent that sets

To conclude , should we be demanding that parity be the way to view the conflict and if we are okay with the tunnels being " terror tunnels " we should also be okay with the same labels being applied to Israeli actions that engender fear into Palestinians ?

A list for this purpose might look like the following

The Israeli terror administrative detention programme

The terror wars against Gaza

The Israeli terror siege of Gaza

The Israeli terror occupation of the Palestinians

The Israeli terror targeted assassination programme

The terror Israeli buffer zone

The terror illegal settlers in the West Bank

If you find the above ridiculous then you should maybe recall the context of the tag being used to describe something that instils fears in the people on the other side. If you still think it ridiculous then maybe you should ask yourself why you so readily accept it when it is applied only to Palestinian activities and/or your own claim to " objectivity "
 
Last edited:

Fledermaus

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
84,757
Reaction score
16,626
Location
Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Keeping with the theme as outlined in the " Terror Tunnels ? " thread we perhaps need to go a little deeper to see how perceptions are shaped by the use of the terminology

With regards to the " terror tunnels " into Israeli from Gaza it came about that a poster made the point that , even if they had not been used for ant terror attacks , their existence and the effect it had on Israeli civilians living near the border was enough to justify the term. I think that's what they meant to infer anyhow. No matter let's take it as a reasonable point

The tunnels engender fear in the Israeli border communities and as such the term " terror tunnel " is valid. Okay so let's leave that as the statement to work from

Moving on let's have the same thing applied to the Palestinian people , in an attempt at objective analysis. Wishing to apply the same standards to both parties

So what acts and/or actions do the Israeli side carry out that will engender fear in the Palestinian population under siege and/or occupation ? And if we identify them properly should we label the in the same way ? To me , if you seek to be objective there can only be one answer to that question ,

I would say the reality of the military occupation and/or siege the Palestinians live under would be sure to engender understandable fears amongst the Palestinians. So that should be included

The targeted assassination programme is sure to be included too. Living with drones buzzing overhead , not knowing if the car that passing you in the street is the intended target for a missile strike that may well kill you in the process

The frequent wide scale military attacks in which , every time , masses of innocents people are always killed would also make that list without any issue or controversy

The Gazan buffer zone too would see Palestinians justifiably scared of being shot for entering it to farm it or scavenge from it

The policy of administrative detention which sees people arrested , often at night , and taken away without charge or trial is sure to make it too

If the list above is capable of engendering fears into Palestinian people , which is surely the case , then why aren't we wondering why they are not given the same treatment when it comes the terminology being used ?

Are Palestinian fears less important than Israeli fears ? They shouldn't be

At this point , or earlier , you might be wondering why is this a big deal ?

Well, to me if you class all actions by the Palestinians as terrorism and or seek to tack it on to this type of subject then the demonization taking place of the Palestinians is highly dangerous as we have seen before when a people are being dehumanized . It can see people grant themselves and get support for things , crimes and atrocities , that would never be allowed without it

In a recent thread a poster here circumvented their own definition of terrorism so as to label the children throwing stones as "terrorists" engaged in terrorism. You won't need me to tell you how chilling a precedent that sets

To conclude , should we be demanding that parity be the way to view the conflict and if we are okay with the tunnels being " terror tunnels " we should also be okay with the same labels being applied to Israeli actions that engender fear into Palestinians ?

A list for this purpose might look like the following

The Israeli terror administrative detention programme

The Israeli terror siege of Gaza

The Israeli terror occupation of the Palestinians

The Israeli terror targeted assassination programme

The terror Israeli buffer zone

If you find the above ridiculous then you should maybe recall the context of the tag being used to describe something that instils fears in the people on the other side. If you still think it ridiculous then maybe you should ask yourself why you so readily accept it when it is applied only to Palestinian activities and/or your own claim to " objectivity "

What "siege of Gaza"?
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
If you have to ask, you have already dismissed the answer. So why ask?

It was easier than addressing the thread matter
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
A glorious example of a non answer....

Says the person that never even attempted any comment on the thread matter and , imo , tried an instant derailment instead
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,134
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
The tunnels are called terror tunnels because their intention is to attack civilians. It's stupid and insane to draw an equation between actual terrorists and the legitimate actions taken against them and should be seen as another expression of support for said violence of terror nature.
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
The OP brings up this so called "siege of Gaza"....

What "siege" are you talking about?

derailment attempt two

try discussing the theme of the thread
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
The tunnels are called terror tunnels because their intention is to attack civilians.

Speculation that belongs in the terror tunnel thread itself. This thread is concerned with what instils fear and the terror tag association that has been offered in that thread but is set to be investigated here
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,134
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Speculation that belongs in the terror tunnel thread itself. This thread is concerned with what instils fear and the terror tag association that has been offered in that thread but is set to be investigated here

Then don't repeat a debunked assertion. Second part of my comment regarding an equation drawn between acts of terror and the legitimate actions taken against them remains relevant, if anyone feels terrorized by an insanely justified blockade on a territory controlled by murderous terrorists he should clearly blame the terrorists as it's only common sense.
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Then don't repeat a debunked assertion.

There wasn't one. You claim the tunnels are for terrorist attack the facts say they have never been used for such. And as I said earlier it isn't really relevant to the theme under discussion which is that their very existence justifies the term because of the fear they engender. Easy enough distinction to understand

Second part of my comment regarding an equation drawn between acts of terror and the legitimate actions taken against them remains relevant, if anyone feels terrorized by an insanely justified blockade on a territory controlled by murderous terrorists he should clearly blame the terrorists as it's only common sense.

Once again you manage to be off the mark

The blame game isn't the subject under discussion either. We are solely talking about the terminology used to describe acts that engender fear being related to " terror ". They appear to be accepted if the victim is Jewish/Israeli but seem to be rejected if the victim is Palestinian. Again an easy enough distinction to understand
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Is not the "siege of Gaza" part of the Terminology you speak of?

Why yes it is...

How can you label something the "Siege of Gaza" if you cannot explain what this so called "siege" is?

Derailment attempt 3

Why ?

Because you want to focus on a miniscule part of a large post in order NOT to discuss the overall subject matter

Obvious and continued derailment attempts , no more no less

If you actually wanted to discuss the subject you could easily do so by ignoring that very small part and answering the heart of the theme within the entire post. You don't want to , obviously
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,134
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
There wasn't one. You claim the tunnels are for terrorist attack the facts say they have never been used for such. And as I said earlier it isn't really relevant to the theme under discussion which is that their very existence justifies the term because of the fear they engender. Easy enough distinction to understand

If it's not relevant don't mention it as you did in the OP, and it is a debunked assertion. That they haven't managed to carry out an attack doesn't remove their intention.

The blame game isn't the subject under discussion either. We are solely talking about the terminology used to describe acts that engender fear being related to " terror ". They appear to be accepted if the victim is Jewish/Israeli but seem to be rejected if the victim is Palestinian. Again an easy enough distinction to understand

No, you want to draw an equation between the terrorists' actions and the legitimate actions taken to protect against them, you're claiming people are being hypocrites when they don't refer to the threat from Palestinian terrorists the same way they refer to the Israeli defensive actions taken against these acts of terrorism. Again, if a Palestinian feels 'terrorized' by the existence of an insanely legitimate Egyptian and Israeli blockade on a territory run by brutal Islamist terrorists, the action that makes him feel terrorized is caused by Palestinian terrorists. It's a fairly simple concept that you're struggling with here.
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,134
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Derailment attempt 3

Why ?

Because you want to focus on a miniscule part of a large post in order NOT to discuss the overall subject matter

Obvious and continued derailment attempts , no more no less

If you actually wanted to discuss the subject you could easily do so by ignoring that very small part and answering the heart of the theme within the entire post. You don't want to , obviously

Have you moved from false accusations of strawman to false accusations of thread derailment?
He refers to your very own words in the very OP, it couldn't get less of a derailment than that, it's entirely legitimate to question your words no matter how much it strangely upsets you. Perhaps it'd be much better answering his comment instead of using this diversion tactics only seeking to derail your own thread to more of the same 'arguments for the sake of arguing'.
 

Fledermaus

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2014
Messages
84,757
Reaction score
16,626
Location
Peoples Republic of California AKA Taxifornia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Derailment attempt 3

Why ?

Because you want to focus on a miniscule part of a large post in order NOT to discuss the overall subject matter

Obvious and continued derailment attempts , no more no less

If you actually wanted to discuss the subject you could easily do so by ignoring that very small part and answering the heart of the theme within the entire post. You don't want to , obviously

Why is it a derail? The question is about the OP you started. It addresses one portion because it is easier to do so.

What "siege of Gaza" are you referring to?

Or is this another case of you calling Israeli actions something other than what they actually are? AKA misrepresentation. AKA lying.

But if you wish we can address another...

The "terror war on Gaza"....

When did that occur?

I know of military operations targeting Hamas and Hamas affiliates.... Remember it is you insisting terror must be directed at civilians. The target of these operations was Hamas.

How can it be a "terror" war when combatants were the targets?
 

CJ 2.0

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 13, 2010
Messages
5,418
Reaction score
1,903
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Derailment attempt 3

Why ?

Because you want to focus on a miniscule part of a large post in order NOT to discuss the overall subject matter

Obvious and continued derailment attempts , no more no less

If you actually wanted to discuss the subject you could easily do so by ignoring that very small part and answering the heart of the theme within the entire post. You don't want to , obviously

What’s the subject matter?

There are disputed territories that exist because the Arabs failed in their attempt to destroy Israel and refused to recognize any borders. There has never been a Palestinian state and no other state has ever had legitimate sovereign control over the territory so it can’t be “occupied”.

Once the Palestinians accept it they should get self determination in some portion of that territory but other than population centres (outside Jerusalem’s old city which is and should remain Israeli), there is no reason a priori why the Arabs looking to create a new state have a better claim than the Israelis who were effectively granted that territory through the San Remo conference outcome on down.

So you can play with your invented definitions and manipulations while pretending there is any sort of objectivity associated with them, but Israel’s opponents have mastered the soviet language manipulation game for a very long time so please now don’t try to pretend it’s the other side which doesn’t use language properly.

It’s just a continuation of the Big Lie strategy you guys have followed for decades (eg zionism is racism and the PLO were “freedom fighters”, even in 1964).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
What’s the subject matter?

it was explained well enough in the opening post but I didn't take into account the lack of comprehension skills of some of the posters here

here's how it was set out
oneworld2 said:
The tunnels engender fear in the Israeli border communities and as such the term " terror tunnel " is valid. Okay so let's leave that as the statement to work from

Moving on let's have the same thing applied to the Palestinian people , in an attempt at objective analysis. Wishing to apply the same standards to both parties

So what acts and/or actions do the Israeli side carry out that will engender fear in the Palestinian population under siege and/or occupation ? And if we identify them properly should we label them in the same way ? To me , if you seek to be objective there can only be one answer to that question


Not hard to understand but people still manage to or maybe just with malicious intent
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
There are disputed territories that exist because the Arabs failed in their attempt to destroy Israel and refused to recognize any borders. There has never been a Palestinian state and no other state has ever had legitimate sovereign control over the territory so it can’t be “occupied”.

So let's put this to bed and nip all the derailing efforts in the bud

We have a choice. We can believe that you are right and there is no occupation of Palestinian territory or we can believe The International Court of Justice , The Israeli Supreme Court and the US State Department

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statu...pied_by_Israel_in_1967#"Occupied_territories"

Call me a radical but I'm going with those well known legal bodies over your own personal opinion.

Hardly anyone supports your view and many that do are the extreme religious fanatics that make up around 20% of the illegal settler population . A population you also probably won't see as illegal due to the earlier expressed view that there is " no occupation ". which is also the view of a tiny minority of people and shows just how extreme your views really are compared to the mainstream.
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Have you moved from false accusations of strawman to false accusations of thread derailment?

Neither are false

I have explained why any talk of what is being targeted is outside of the topic of what the actions themselves engender in the respective civilian populations.

Hamas has never attacked civilians from the tunnels from Gaza but the fear that they might amongst the civilian population , their existence posing a genuine and understandable threat which engenders fear of harm has been posited as a justification for them being , legitimately , referred to as terror tunnels.

Thus

IDF attacks that are aimed , allegedly , at targeting Hamas combatants likewise pose an understandable and real danger to the lives of the civilian population of Gaza could be deemed as terror attacks if they , as they do , engender fear of death or injury to them too. In fact the numbers killed every time serve to completely validate those fears
 

Apocalypse

DEATH TO ANTARCTICA!!!
DP Veteran
Joined
May 14, 2009
Messages
20,134
Reaction score
6,384
Location
Israel
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Neither are false

I have explained why any talk of what is being targeted is outside of the topic of what the actions themselves engender in the respective civilian populations.

Hamas has never attacked civilians from the tunnels from Gaza but the fear that they might amongst the civilian population , their existence posing a genuine and understandable threat which engenders fear of harm has been posited as a justification for them being , legitimately , referred to as terror tunnels.

Thus

IDF attacks that are aimed , allegedly , at targeting Hamas combatants likewise pose an understandable and real danger to the lives of the civilian population of Gaza could be deemed as terror attacks if they , as they do , engender fear of death or injury to them too. In fact the numbers killed every time serve to completely validate those fears

Both are false clearly, you cannot claim that someone is derailing a thread by referring to text from the OP no matter how much it upsets you, it's not even up for discussion and hopefully this is where it ends otherwise you continue to derail your own thread by attacking those referring to the OP.

Hamas are a terror group that carries attacks on civilians as part of an agenda, they openly speak about their intentions and indeed have been following through with dozens of thousands of terror attacks directed at civilians, so when such organization is digging a tunnel deep into Israeli territory it's safe to call these terror tunnels, no one should be afraid that he might be demonizing one of the most brutal terror groups out there and no one who hasn't completely lost every shard of the humanity he was born with should protest and cry that one of the most brutal terror groups out there is being demonized.
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
If it's not relevant don't mention it as you did in the OP, and it is a debunked assertion. That they haven't managed to carry out an attack doesn't remove their intention.

I mentioned it in the opening line purely because it was an idea that came up in that thread that I thought needed a deeper inspection. That's it and was obviously it all along. Your wish to complain about everything is well documented and mostly irrelevant anyway imo

And that assertion was never debunked.

The facts support that assertion and your alleged debunking was built on speculation and denial of crucial factors


No, you want to draw an equation between the terrorists' actions and the legitimate actions taken to protect against them, you're claiming people are being hypocrites when they don't refer to the threat from Palestinian terrorists the same way they refer to the Israeli defensive actions taken against these acts of terrorism. Again, if a Palestinian feels 'terrorized' by the existence of an insanely legitimate Egyptian and Israeli blockade on a territory run by brutal Islamist terrorists, the action that makes him feel terrorized is caused by Palestinian terrorists. It's a fairly simple concept that you're struggling with here.

If the Palestinian ever ceased the resort to terrorism you would have to do it to yourselves
\
Many of your actions are not legitimate, just as many of theirs aren't

To claim legitimacy for an armed attack/act of war you have to exhaust all peaceful alternatives. Refusing a ceasefire with Hamas is clearly contrary to that and as such the attacks themselves are illegitimate

The IDF engages in many indiscriminate attacks as do the Hamas combatants. All illegitimate

The blockade is obviously a collective punishment and thus a war crime committed against 1.8 million people every day , 365 days a year

The administrative detentions contravene due process and are violations of the rights of people under occupation.

As an occupying power you have much more in the way of responsibilities for the well being of the people you occupy than you appear to be aware of................

https://www.icrc.org/en/doc/resources/documents/misc/634kfc.htm


Seeing as this blockade will engender real fears of poor health and thus disease or death from disease within the civilian population should these fears , as with the fears of Israelis from the tunnels , be referred to as the terror blockade ? Or is that an option open only to Israeli civilians ?
 

oneworld2

Handsome Pitbull
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Messages
13,853
Reaction score
1,939
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Both are false clearly, you cannot claim that someone is derailing a thread by referring to text from the OP no matter how much it upsets you, it's not even up for discussion and hopefully this is where it ends otherwise you continue to derail your own thread by attacking those referring to the OP.

Nope , I explained the difference clearly enough , it's just that you cannot counter it so you just carry on down the same wrong street proclaiming some sort of victory. It's sad tbh but wholly customary of your approach to debate imo

Hamas are a terror group that carries attacks on civilians as part of an agenda, they openly speak about their intentions and indeed have been following through with dozens of thousands of terror attacks directed at civilians, so when such organization is digging a tunnel deep into Israeli territory it's safe to call these terror tunnels, no one should be afraid that he might be demonizing one of the most brutal terror groups out there and no one who hasn't completely lost every shard of the humanity he was born with should protest and cry that one of the most brutal terror groups out there is being demonized.

Have they not also carried out many acts of legitimate armed resistance too that has been miscast as terrorism ? Isn't it true that you don't want to see them get better weapons because they might actually not have to resort to such tactics ? Isn't it you that doesn't want a ceasefire agreement with them that would curtail all of their attacks , terrorist and non terrorist ?

In short without their resort to terrorist actions and/or indiscriminate attacks you would be laid bare as mass rights violators , illegal occupiers and illegal settlers , illegal annexers , etc etc

No wonder you don't want any changes aimed at or likely to stop the likelihood of future terrorist attacks. You're just trying to fool people that you do
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom