• 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!

US guns are being aimed at Palestinian kids. Washington can take them away

Fledermaus said:
Feel free to share the ratio of Hamas attacks on civilian targets vs. The attacks on military targets....

Oh, wait...

You won't.
Click to expand...

It's good you have felt free to expose your lack of understanding of what the word indiscriminate means
 
oneworld2 said:
I don't think you give a flying about America or its citizens. Nor about terrorism itself. This is just the heartless but pragmatical use of 9/11, and all of those who tragically died as a result of it, to support the ongoing state terrorism of your own nation and to have the USA keep on bankrolling/enabling you while it's being done. Thousands of Palestinians are being/have been killed by Israeli state terrorism backed by the state terrorist govts of the US.Thousands more by US state terrorism but you defend that because your position is FAKE

Some of us, people who are genuinely opposed to terrorism, wish to see ALL who engage in it either brought to justice or the conflicts that supply recruits for them brought to an end/just resolution. We see our own terrorism as well as theirs and comdemn it all. You only condemn the terrorism of some but defend the terrorism of your own and its allies. It's like the FAKE anti terrorist position that people have been conditioned to support. Your role, as I see it, is to bolster that FAKE position precisely so people will support acts they would nver support if they hadn't been so brainwashed by propaganda/hasbara
Click to expand...

Thanks for the meltdown but I'm not sure what it has to do with what I just said.
My position is not "fake" and if anything it's probably the most consistent in the history of these boards, I oppose terrorism and as such I make your opposition here, as simple as that, not "Israel", not "Palestinians", and not anything else. Merely one side that needs to support murder like a living creature needs oxygen and the other side that opposes it for the sake of the values of Western society and all that is clearly important.
What is "your own" terrorism anyway? No idea.
 
Apocalypse said:
Thanks for the meltdown but I'm not sure what it has to do with what I just said.
My position is not "fake" and if anything it's probably the most consistent in the history of these boards, I oppose terrorism and as such I make your opposition here, as simple as that, not "Israel", not "Palestinians", and not anything else. Merely one side that needs to support murder like a living creature needs oxygen and the other side that opposes it for the sake of the values of Western society and all that is clearly important.
What is "your own" terrorism anyway? No idea.
Click to expand...


☺ Meltdown?? It was just a truth offensive about your fake opposition to terrorism. If terrorism is directed and your own people it is terrorism. If it is your own people engaging in state terrorism it is legitimate self defence lols

Transparent and fake.

The Israel/Palestine is a national liberation struggle, your constant references to " radical Islam " is a pure and obvious piggy backing off of the 9/11 attacks to garner support with US posters, in particular and anyone else who will fall for it. Quite a large group now that the bogus war on terror has made Muslims the new targets for attack and bigotry in the West. You would think a people so affected by the same would have a whole lot more sympathy for/awareness of this racial/religious bigotry and a small but highly respectable group of Jewish Israelis and maybe a larger group in the diaspora Jewish community do. Then there are those who mostly post indefence of it like yourself.

The " values of Western society " lols...........they are for PR reasons and meant to be taken seriously only by the targeted populations of the West itself. A manufactured consent for their own state terrorism. Those on the receiving end know better the " values of the West "
 
Fledermaus said:
Feel free to avoid the fact Hamas targets civilians almost exclusively...
Click to expand...


Feel free to ignore the link I gave you where IDF soldiers were shooting unarmed Palestinians waving white flags.
 
oneworld2 said:
☺ Meltdown?? It was just a truth offensive about your fake opposition to terrorism. If terrorism is directed and your own people it is terrorism. If it is your own people engaging in state terrorism it is legitimate self defence lols

Transparent and fake.

The Israel/Palestine is a national liberation struggle, your constant references to " radical Islam " is a pure and obvious piggy backing off of the 9/11 attacks to garner support with US posters, in particular and anyone else who will fall for it. Quite a large group now that the bogus war on terror has made Muslims the new targets for attack and bigotry in the West. You would think a people so affected by the same would have a whole lot more sympathy for/awareness of this racial/religious bigotry and a small but highly respectable group of Jewish Israelis and maybe a larger group in the diaspora Jewish community do. Then there are those who mostly post indefence of it like yourself.

The " values of Western society " lols...........they are for PR reasons and meant to be taken seriously only by the targeted populations of the West itself. A manufactured consent for their own state terrorism. Those on the receiving end know better the " values of the West "
Click to expand...

Words have meaning and our feelings have nothing to do with them. Terrorism is not for me or you to identify, it is identified by the actions of its perpetrators.
What you call 'state terrorism' is self-defense while what you call "resistance" are the murders of innocent people, it is your decision to ignore reality and define terms by your feelings of hatred towards the group that is targeted and the group that is defending itself.
Terrorism has existed long before 9/11 and I'm not sure what is this new injection you're making here.
There's nothing fake about opposing the murder of innocent civilians, and those who maintain the values of Western society will always hold the moral high ground over those who simply throw their support for anyone engaging in violence against innocents - again, the two sides of the discussion here. The pro-murder camp represented by you and the ones who call for freedoms, security, and prosperity, who oppose you. It's all far too simple.
 
Apocalypse said:
Words have meaning and our feelings have nothing to do with them. Terrorism is not for me or you to identify, it is identified by the actions of its perpetrators.
Click to expand...

There is no universally accepted definition of terrorism and it is up to us all to both condemn the terrorism of others AND the terrorism of our own. Just because a country might engage in violent actions, often aimed at civilian targets, to illicit a political goal they don't get left off the list for engaging in terrorism imo.

The state terrorism of countries accounts for vastly more death and destruction than the group terrorism peope have been conditioned to see as the only form of terrorism. It's junk and if people wish to be taken seriously as being against terrorism then they need to free themselves from any nationalistic obligation/compulsion to have to redefine the term so their own violent and murderous actions don't qualify. That's the reason that there is no universally accepted definition. It's a ruse, a sham

If the West wants people to stop engaging in terrorism against it then it needs to stop engaging in it against them. That's the simple equation that seems to elude everyone who cannot see past their own state propaganda system dogma.
 
Apocalypse said:
What you call 'state terrorism' is self-defense while what you call "resistance" are the murders of innocent people, it is your decision to ignore reality and define terms by your feelings of hatred towards the group that is targeted and the group that is defending itself.
Click to expand...

No, what you call self defence is the defence against the people your own state terrorism is trying to crush. We are conditioned into the who did it and where but NEVER the why. The why is the most important imho because until we in the West see and seek to stop our own state terrorism/coercion/domination of others that acts as a recruitment officer for the future terrorists planning stuff against us the cycle will continue. People who are truly against terrorism will see the value in that, those that refuse will always be part of the problem itself.

The Palestinians have been trying to defend themselves from the displacement and dispossession Zionism has presented to them since the latter part of the 19th century. They are thus the defenders, not the aggressors. The scapegoating of European antisemitism, the original driver for Zionism, onto the Arabs of Palestine is the original sin in this conflict from which all subsequent sins/crimes/injustices have stemmed.

That's just the reality of the situation .
 
Apocalypse said:
Terrorism has existed long before 9/11 and I'm not sure what is this new injection you're making here.
Click to expand...

Nobody is saying it hasn't. The difference is that Israeli hasbara agents have managed to turn what is a national liberation struggle into part of the war on terror by using 9/11 as the common ground with which to try to dupe Americans into supporting and thus supporting the bankrolling of Israeli state crimes against the Palestinians that have been going on for decades and are getting worse. The recourse to " radical Islam " and radical Islamists " wishes to exploit 9/11 and the phoney war on terror and hide the fact that this is a national liberation situation and not the same as the Wests war on Muslims and/or any others that aren't willing to jump to it's orders.
 
oneworld2 said:
Nobody cares if you recognize it or not, get over yourself. lols More than 2/3rds of the worlds nations recognized the state of Palestine.

The ME is what it is because of it's resource value and thus it's importance in the great game, it's not because Arabs/Muslims happen to live there
Click to expand...

Recognizing it doesn't make it a state or country. It doesn't matter if 99% recognize it
 
oneworld2 said:
Nobody is saying it hasn't. The difference is that Israeli hasbara agents have managed to turn what is a national liberation struggle into part of the war on terror by using 9/11 as the common ground with which to try to dupe Americans into supporting and thus supporting the bankrolling of Israeli state crimes against the Palestinians that have been going on for decades and are getting worse. The recourse to " radical Islam " and radical Islamists " wishes to exploit 9/11 and the phoney war on terror and hide the fact that this is a national liberation situation and not the same as the Wests war on Muslims and/or any others that aren't willing to jump to it's orders.
Click to expand...

It is part of the war on terror, it nearly always was throughout the entire conflict the leading source of terrorism on the planet.
 
oneworld2 said:
No, what you call self defence is the defence against the people your own state terrorism is trying to crush. We are conditioned into the who did it and where but NEVER the why. The why is the most important imho because until we in the West see and seek to stop our own state terrorism/coercion/domination of others that acts as a recruitment officer for the future terrorists planning stuff against us the cycle will continue. People who are truly against terrorism will see the value in that, those that refuse will always be part of the problem itself.

The Palestinians have been trying to defend themselves from the displacement and dispossession Zionism has presented to them since the latter part of the 19th century. They are thus the defenders, not the aggressors. The scapegoating of European antisemitism, the original driver for Zionism, onto the Arabs of Palestine is the original sin in this conflict from which all subsequent sins/crimes/injustices have stemmed.

That's just the reality of the situation .
Click to expand...

What I call self-defense is the act of targeting actual terrorists who try to murder innocents.
What you call "state terrorism" is the very same thing. The problem is with how you let your feelings of hatred define words for you. It's stupid.

The motivation for terrorism isn't relevant, whether you murder a little girl because she is Jewish and you hate Jews or because you believe it's a good thing to do to advance your people's national aspirations or because it's what you think your God will look positively at or because you have voices in your head, the result is the same and the inhumanity is the same - you murdered an innocent little girl.

The ones who murder innocents are never defending anything. The ones who target them always do.
 
oneworld2 said:
There is no universally accepted definition of terrorism and it is up to us all to both condemn the terrorism of others AND the terrorism of our own. Just because a country might engage in violent actions, often aimed at civilian targets, to illicit a political goal they don't get left off the list for engaging in terrorism imo.

The state terrorism of countries accounts for vastly more death and destruction than the group terrorism peope have been conditioned to see as the only form of terrorism. It's junk and if people wish to be taken seriously as being against terrorism then they need to free themselves from any nationalistic obligation/compulsion to have to redefine the term so their own violent and murderous actions don't qualify. That's the reason that there is no universally accepted definition. It's a ruse, a sham

If the West wants people to stop engaging in terrorism against it then it needs to stop engaging in it against them. That's the simple equation that seems to elude everyone who cannot see past their own state propaganda system dogma.
Click to expand...

Where did I refer to a "universally accepted definition"? I don't find any such thing relevant here. Words have meaning, regardless of if everyone agree on them or not. If they are "universally" accepted.

State terrorism would be the targeting of innocents on purpose by a state. Not the targeting of terrorists.
 
Apocalypse said:
It is part of the war on terror, it nearly always was throughout the entire conflict the leading source of terrorism on the planet.
Click to expand...

The US state dept movers and shakers once, circa 1944, referred to the ME oil deposits in the following terms ................" the oil resources constitute a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history. "

Thus that is how the entire ME region should be seen as the hot bed it is and how this might factor into how the players in the great game of geopolitics are involved there. That is the REAL , second declaration, reason regarding what the war on terror is all about. That it is a hot bed of discontent and violence shouldn't surprise anyone, imo. People who are robbed, cheated, abused, suppressed, abused, violated tend to react in similar ways, especially when the enemy has all the big guns and cards stacked in their favour. Thus the massive Western backed/sponsored state terrorism/repression meted out to the people of the region is the cause of the blow back attacks you wish to present as being initiated by the victims. Always the cart before the horse in an inversion of reality

If there were no oil there to control/protect do you seriously think the USA would be bankrolling and enabling the ongoing crimes committed by the state of Israel ?

The Palestine/Israel conflict has always been about national liberation stuggles. That Israeli propagandists have used 9/11 to their own advantage in misrepresenting a nationalist struggle for a religious one, by focusing on two groups only, Hamas/Hezbollah, is as obvious as it gets to people familiar with the subject. IT's the " now you know what we have had to live with " schtick so as to dupe Americans into believing a false comparison and thus support the state itself.
 
Rudy said:
LOL! Every single person in this thread is telling you that you're wrong.

Doesn't that make you pause and reexamine your opinion?
Click to expand...


I just look at their level of knowledge and their capacity to actually think for themselves, add in their ability or not to empathize and their open mindedness or not and take it from there. The rockets fron Gaza are indiscriminate attacks aimed at weakening the resolve of the people from state of Israel to carry on their sytematic abuses against those launching the rockets. The context is that it is happening in an ongoing armed conflict.

It's not my fault people don't understand the differences.
 
Apocalypse said:
What I call self-defense is the act of targeting actual terrorists who try to murder innocents.
What you call "state terrorism" is the very same thing. The problem is with how you let your feelings of hatred define words for you. It's stupid.

The motivation for terrorism isn't relevant, whether you murder a little girl because she is Jewish and you hate Jews or because you believe it's a good thing to do to advance your people's national aspirations or because it's what you think your God will look positively at or because you have voices in your head, the result is the same and the inhumanity is the same - you murdered an innocent little girl.

The ones who murder innocents are never defending anything. The ones who target them always do.
Click to expand...


The Palestinians have, from the outset of Zionism, been fighting to stop it dispossessing and displacing them from their homeland. They are the ones acting in self defence. What you class as self defence is the right to defend yourself from those you are systematically abusing and killing in a bid to annexe their lands, or what you want of them.

Israel is the aggressor today, Zionism was the aggresor before the state existed and the Palestinians are the true victims that have fought to defend themselves from dispossession and displacement.
 
Apocalypse said:
Where did I refer to a "universally accepted definition"? I don't find any such thing relevant here. Words have meaning, regardless of if everyone agree on them or not. If they are "universally" accepted.

State terrorism would be the targeting of innocents on purpose by a state. Not the targeting of terrorists.
Click to expand...


You didn't mention it, I did. And the reason there is no universally accepted version is highly illustrative of the point I have been making...................... when they do it it's terrorism, when we do it it's not. The people conducting the Nuremberg trials faced the same dilemma. Both sides had systematically bombed cities and thus were responsible for the enormous civilian casualties that resulted from it. How can you charge someone for engaging in an action that you yourself had engaged in?

This is the world of applying the same standards to all parties and this is where people with such selective applications as yourself are exposed for not doing so.

If you refuse to do this because of some nationalistic loyalty that's fine, but it leaves you open to charges of bias that are easily sustained and supported.
 
oneworld2 said:
The Palestinians have, from the outset of Zionism, been fighting to stop it dispossessing and displacing them from their homeland. They are the ones acting in self defence. What you class as self defence is the right to defend yourself from those you are systematically abusing and killing in a bid to annexe their lands, or what you want of them.

Israel is the aggressor today, Zionism was the aggresor before the state existed and the Palestinians are the true victims that have fought to defend themselves from dispossession and displacement.
Click to expand...

Which Palestine are you referring to? The one made up by the PLO and the Soviets?
 
jotathought said:
Recognizing it doesn't make it a state or country. It doesn't matter if 99% recognize it
Click to expand...

Other states recognizing the people/territory of an area to be a state is as good signifier of it's legitimacy, as can be seen by the difference in the numbers of states supporting the existence of the Palestinian state against those supporting the attempted annexations of areas by the state of Israel.

I am going with the fact that around 2/3rds of the total of countries in the world recognize the existence of a Palestinian state in the OPTs than nobody recognizing them as Israeli state territory. That it is not yet a self determining sovereign state due to an ongoing military foreign occupation doesn't seem to deter acceptance of it as a territorial entity.

You can cry foul if you want to.
 
oneworld2 said:
You didn't mention it, I did. And the reason there is no universally accepted version is highly illustrative of the point I have been making...................... when they do it it's terrorism, when we do it it's not. The people conducting the Nuremberg trials faced the same dilemma. Both sides had systematically bombed cities and thus were responsible for the enormous civilian casualties that resulted from it. How can you charge someone for engaging in an action that you yourself had engaged in?

This is the world of applying the same standards to all parties and this is where people with such selective applications as yourself are exposed for not doing so.

If you refuse to do this because of some nationalistic loyalty that's fine, but it leaves you open to charges of bias that are easily sustained and supported.
Click to expand...

It's not a nationalistic loyalty, it's a human loyalty to draw a difference between murder and not-murder.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Which Palestine are you referring to? The one made up by the PLO and the Soviets?
Click to expand...

The one that was voted on in the UN circa Novemebr 1947
 
oneworld2 said:
The US state dept movers and shakers once, circa 1944, referred to the ME oil deposits in the following terms ................" the oil resources constitute a stupendous source of strategic power, and one of the greatest material prizes in world history. "

Thus that is how the entire ME region should be seen as the hot bed it is and how this might factor into how the players in the great game of geopolitics are involved there. That is the REAL , second declaration, reason regarding what the war on terror is all about. That it is a hot bed of discontent and violence shouldn't surprise anyone, imo. People who are robbed, cheated, abused, suppressed, abused, violated tend to react in similar ways, especially when the enemy has all the big guns and cards stacked in their favour. Thus the massive Western backed/sponsored state terrorism/repression meted out to the people of the region is the cause of the blow back attacks you wish to present as being initiated by the victims. Always the cart before the horse in an inversion of reality

If there were no oil there to control/protect do you seriously think the USA would be bankrolling and enabling the ongoing crimes committed by the state of Israel ?

The Palestine/Israel conflict has always been about national liberation stuggles. That Israeli propagandists have used 9/11 to their own advantage in misrepresenting a nationalist struggle for a religious one, by focusing on two groups only, Hamas/Hezbollah, is as obvious as it gets to people familiar with the subject. IT's the " now you know what we have had to live with " schtick so as to dupe Americans into believing a false comparison and thus support the state itself.
Click to expand...

The Israeli-Arab conflict has been a national conflict, what the Palestinians have been doing however is mostly terrorism and they have made the major source of terrorists for the last several decades, way before 9/11.
 
Apocalypse said:
It's not a nationalistic loyalty, it's a human loyalty to draw a difference between murder and not-murder.
Click to expand...

Of course it's a nationalistic loyalty. If you had a human loyalty you wouldn't be portraying the victims as the aggressors
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom