Why does anyone have to take sides in this conflict?

[dem629]

There are people who are intensely pro-Israel and blame everything on the Palestinians, and there are those who are pro-Palestinian who blame everything on Israel. Seems to me both sides have some responsibility in this, but more than that, I think it sucks that those of us who are striving toward modernity are bogged down by these people and their ancient religious squabbling (i.e. complete bullshit). Screw all of them.

[polichick]

1. The part we need to look at is the U.S. contribution - our hands are not clean.

[dem629]

5. It's too bad we don't just detatch ourselves entirely and let them have their fight.

It's a shame we're even involved at all, in any capacity, on either side.

[polichick]

8. They're using weapons provided by us - just as Saddam did. It's sick.

[dem629]

9. Right. And we should never get involved in their petty cultural/religious nonsense.

[polichick]

11. We only do because we want something. Green energy will save us...

...in more ways than one.

[OCAtheist]

12. Agreed

That's what angers me. Both sides are at fault, but the US gives enormous monetary support to one. According to a reporter on CNN, the White House also gave their blessing on this latest mess.

[Fire1]

82. And therein lies the problem and why the U.S. is treated with

such disdain.

[roguevalley]

88. the only side I am on is the dead and dying. what their nationality

is doesn't matter to me. victims get my sympathy, not the fuckers on each side that made this failure to reason happen. failure of leadership on all sides is cold comfort to the dead.

[LWolf]

110. You nailed that one. nt

[roamer65]

2. Bingo.

We need to change US policy to one of neutrality on the Israel-Palestine issue. Defund ALL of them.

[Fire1]

83. You bet. Take the money away and watch all fighting stop.

[Poll_Blind]

3. Actually, like in so many other matters- those types don't actually represent the parties...

...involved in the conflict. It's like people rooting for their own team against the other- to the extremes. The actual coaches and players, while they may intensely dislike the other team, rarely hate to the level of the fans.

PB

[Kutjara]

4. Because all Palestinians and all Israelis are the same?

There are no non-combatants, no children, no elders, no cripples, no civilians on either side, right? Everyone is a soldier, is that what you're saying? Because it's the only way I can make sense of an otherwise meaningless statement.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kutjara]

10. "Screw all of them" is pretty clear.

Good luck with "striving toward modernity." Sounds like you've got a long road ahead of you.

[dem629]

15. Let them have their fight.

Why should the US be involved on either side?

If they want to hold their silly religious/cultural wars, find, go ahead. But it has nothing to do with us and we should not be involved.

[Kutjara]

18. Maybe because the West has had its dirty fingers in that pie...

...for the best part of a century, manipulating the region for our own interests? Maybe we have some obligation to fix what we helped to break? Maybe because our "strategic interests" have led directly to the deaths and displacement of huge numbers of people?

Just a few ideas.

[dem629]

19. Ah, so one ill-conceived policy justifies another.

Got it.

[Kutjara]

24. The obligation to remedy damage you've caused is ill-conceived?

That sounds like something straight out of the Bush Doctrine.

[dem629]

26. Actually, you have it backwards.

The main argument by the neocons now is that when/if you start something, you should stay an finish it.

That's what's going on in Iraq.

Read up.

[Kutjara]

31. There's a big difference between pursuing the same failed policy over and over....

...and admitting your mistakes and doing what you can to help (and I mean help the people affected, not help the military-industrial constituencies back home).

[dem629]

33. How many American lives is it worth?

[Kutjara]

38. Are American lives more precious than Palestinian or Israeli ones?

How many Palestinian lives is it worth? How many Israeli? Is that the equation you want to make, a cost-benefit analysis of the value of human flesh?

[dem629]

43. So you're willing to risk American blood and treasure over this

because you've cooked up a moral equivalence between the fighting parties and America?

I think it's probably a great subject for a philosophical debate, but here in the real world, presidents, including President Obama will judge whether something is worthy of risking American lives. As he (and every president) should. Again, though, that's just in the real world.

[dem629]

17. Oh, and funny you should mock the phrase

"striving toward modernity" and tell me that I have a long way to go, when you apparently couldn't be more enthusiastic about US involvement (on one side or the other) in a war of silly religious/cultural ideas. Great stuff. Perhaps you're ready to pick up a rock?

[Kutjara]

37. I never said I support US involvement "on one side or the other."

What I believe is that we (and by "we" I mean every nation that has profited from the conflict) has a duty to ensure a just and stable peace is brought to the region. To me, "screw them all" is just the flip side of "stay the course:" it's a knee-jerk reaction to a problem that's proved too tough to solve, so we just drop it, regardless of the consequences to the innocent victims.

Dressing it up in a bit of "local religious squabbles" verbiage just makes it easier to ignore the genuine suffering of human beings. You might as well say, "Well, they're just primitives. Who cares about them?"

Taking sides is the worst thing we can do. Turning our backs is equally bad, because it's the same thing. Within a few months, Israel would overrun Palestinian lands and reabsorb them (no doubt under martial law).

So the "screw them all" argument is basically the "let Israel win" argument in disguise.

[dem629]

40. "ensure a just and stable peace is brought to the region"

LMAO.

If you believe that's going to happen, Sarah Palin would like to sell you a bridge she never built.

This has nothing to do with American interests or security. It's not worth American lives. And YES I am proudly a protectionist.

[Kutjara]

53. If you think keeping the Israelis and Palestinians at each other's throats...

...isn't in America's strategic interest, you really haven't been paying attention. An unstable, squabbling Middle East is exactly what we've been working to achieve for 100 years.

[dem629]

70. Does that involve black helicopters, and an ancient scroll?

[Kutjara]

78. No, just a basic familiarity with the history of the region.

In particular, the alignment between American foreign policy and the interests of the petrochemical industry from about 1950 onwards.

[bread_and_roses]

102. Really. Screw all the dead children getting in the way of "modernity"

And just who is this champion of "modernity?" The US? Exactly since when have we been the peacemakers in this numerous other conflicts around the world slaughtering children?

That's some real "human(e)" POV the OP is promoting.

[Captain Hilts]

6. THANK YOU. No real 'good guys' in this one. Kinda like Georgia-Ossetia-Russia.nt

[Kutjara]

14. Nope, no good guys. Not even the innocent victims.

They all deserve what they get. As the OP said, screw them all. :sarcasm:

[dem629]

16. That's their problem. Why is it ours?

[Kutjara]

21. Because we were instrumental in starting it.

Right back to WWI and before, the West (largely Britain and the US) have been meddling in the region, destabilizing it for our own interests. Now we try to pretend it's all about the locals and their little religious squabbles. Yeah, right.

[dem629]

23. You're making a great neocon-Bush argument

just like the people who want to stay in Iraq just because we were there in the first place.

Sorry, but your idea of following up one bad policy with another is ridiculous.

[Kutjara]

29. I don't recall advocating any particular policy, so I'm not sure...

...what you're talking about. What I am saying is that there's a massive humanitarian crisis going on in the region, much of which has been precipitated by our direct involvement in the region. Merely turning our backs and pretending we had nothing to do with it not only dishonest, it's barbaric.

I never said the solution is military. Nor did I say we should be taking sides. What I said was that the "screw them all" attitude expressed in the OP is the same one you often see...right after we've made a mess of someone else's country and realize we're too stupid to fix what we broke.

It's time we owned up to our mistakes.

[dem629]

32. Any further involvement in that region

risks American lives for nothing, regardless of how that conflict got to where it is now. I realize there are some people who think that we're just as culpable as the people throwing rocks and rockets at each other from both sides, but they bear the responsibility far more than we do.

Your policy of further involvement is approaching that of neocon policy. To pretend like there's a peaceful way to "help" is ludicrous.

[Kutjara]

44. That's nice and convenient, isn't it?

Protect all those precious corn-fed American lives, regardless of how many of those damned foreigners have to die. Never mind we helped to perpetuate the problem, we can just run off and let them sort it out themselves. At least no Americans will be suffering, so that's all right.

Actually working with the rest of the world to try to fix it is "neocon" apparently.

[dem629]

46. Yep.

I know it has all the inconvenience of being a real-world choice, but there you go.

[Kutjara]

51. Most atrocities have been justified in the name of pragmatism.

The "real-world" contains a lot more choices than the binary ones we always seem to fall back on. It just takes people with the imagination (and the humility) to see them.

[Ani Yun Wiya]

92. About further involvement.

Continuing the same failed policies of the last eighty years will certainly put more American lives at risk, perhaps more than what is currently even imagined.

Perhaps the involvement needed is exactly the opposite of how things have been done.

I thought that America was supposed to be a defender of the weak, not a partner of the strongman who bullies his way through human affairs.

Edited for spelling error.

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kutjara]

60. It always troubles me how easily many are able to objectify...

...their fellow human beings into "the other." Once that feat of slight-of-mind is accomplished, it's a small step to the "screw em" or "kill em all and let God sort em out" mentality. It also becomes very easy to value "us" more highly than we value "them."

Our ability to dehumanize other humans lies at the heart of much of the suffering in the world.

[SoCalDem]

28. Poverty & deprivation drives conflict

no matter how much it gets denied.. If you coop up an entire population and cut them off from traveling, or holding meaningful jobs that can support a family, or sending their kids to school, they will turn to whatever group appears to be "on their side".. An organization that offers you food, building supplies, a school for your kids, "may" also ask for your support against their "enemies"..

Our government does this all the time with poor countries.. we send them aid, and then dictate their behavior...when we do it with upper echelon countries, we call it military aid to an ally...or commerce.....when it's a poor country, we call it humanitarian aid.. I'm sure that Hezzbollah & Hamas call their aid "humanitarian" as well..If we do not "approve" of their behavior, we cut people off, demonize them, and drive them into the arms of organizations we "like" even less..and we energize them to a level they probably never realized they could reach.. This is the stuff of worldwide "movements" .

There was a time that countries could bully their neighbors into submission, and it migth get a few paragraphs in papers a few days later, but with cameras everywhere, and the internet, winning hearts & minds, with tanks, soldiers & bullets just won't work anymore..

Either Israelis need to start having 10 kids per family, or they need to come to terms that they will always be a minority, being pressed by an ever-growing Arabic population. They cannot shoot their way out of that fact. Their autonomy will be challenged because of the proximity of the descendents of people their predecessors pushed aside, and nothing will change that fact.. It's time for them alll to fish or cut bait.

[FrenchieCat]

13. There are no sides in this, as they are both wrong.

[EFerrari]

20. "Screw all of them" isn't a position that people interested in social justice normally take.

[dem629]

25. OK.

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Alas, it is a traditional isolationist possition going back

to the dawn of the country. I expect to hear it even more as the economic crisis deepens

:-)

[roamer65]

34. I agree and I support a more isolationist US foreign policy.

We would gain back much prestige by simply letting other peoples solve their own problems.

We have too many problems to solve here at home. Time for us to pay more attention to them.

[EFerrari]

36. What I've learned is that it's not so much a problem of trying to solve

other people's problems but trying to use those problems for the material advantage of the corporati that inevitably causes problems for the people here and there.

[roamer65]

41. You are correct.

Either way, a good dose of moderate isolationism would mostly spare us from these issues. Swiss and Swedish neutrality are good starting points, IMHO.

[nadinbrzezinski]

54. that means abandoning the Empire,

will not happen any time soon regardless of party in charge

This has been foreign policy since 1898

[EFerrari]

35. nadin -- Studs Terkel's memorial at Cooper Hall was on CSPAN today

and it was grand.

Fyi:

http://www.booktv.org/program.aspx?ProgramId=10060&SectionName=Public%20Lives

:hi:

[LeftishBrit]

39. I agree

I don't believe in taking sides either, but in the sense that both sides are perpetuating the spiral of violence and neither are innocent. And I think the role of other influential countries is to try to push toward peace. We contributed to the mess (the Brits even more than the Americans, as we were the colonial power for many years); and in any case I think there's a part for the rest of the world to play in facilitating a peace process. I have hopes for Obama playing a constructive role here.

Even if one wished to be totally isolationist, one can't in these days, as there is so much interconnection between different countries and what one country does ultimately affects others.

[EFerrari]

47. I think America has now outdone the British in enabling this violence

to our shame. :(

[balantz]

22. The corporate empires partner the U.S. and Israel in regional control.

It's a shameful game of political and resource control that uses any means necessary to dominate the region. Israel has long been used as a partner in crime by the corporate elite oiligarchy. By keeping the arab peoples divided and appearing to be the demons then the region can be better controlled. Some nations like Jordan and UAR are able to play different hands in the game.

[nadinbrzezinski]

27. It goes beyond religious squabling

that said I am amazed at how little the propaganda on BOTH sides has changed in more than two decades... Ok Hamas was not around two decades ago.. but their propaganda is the same

So that is a hint.

That said people are dying...

but don't expect even handedness to be received with anything but vitriol by both sides.

[LeftishBrit]

42. Agreed; there is remarkable continuity in the propaganda on both sides.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[nadinbrzezinski]

50. And religion is the patina...of current use

the region has had armies going over it for the last 7,000 years AT LEAST... probably 10K years to be exact

But religion is the current excuse

Look at a map

The clue is in geography, not Allah, Yahveh, or Christ.

I guess at one point it was due to Lot, Migdal and Osiris.

I forgot Zeus, and Mars... sorry.

:sarcasm:

The reason is quite simple...it CONNECTS trade routes. It is a STRATEGIC piece of real estate.

So yes, you are right, but for the wrong reason, assuming humans haven't gone extinct in a thousand years...a real possibility, we will continue to fight over trade routes... hell the other one we are currently involved in is the ancient silk road. (Afghanistan and the Central Asian grand chess game)

[MajorChode]

61. Trade routes?

What trade routes are you talking about?

The silk road never went through Jerusalem. It wouldn't have made sense geography wise. Jerusalem sits on the high ground and any overland routes would have gone far to the north through Babylon or to the south through the Suez area.

If you go to the disputed areas an look around, you start to scratch your head and wonder why so many have fought for so long over such a shithole.

[nadinbrzezinski]

114. Read again, the OTHER TRADE ROUTE, the one we are currently involved

that is Afghanistan, part of the CENTRAL ASIAN GAME... the one WE ARE UP TO OUR NECKS IN RIGHT NOW.

Now to Israel it connects Asia with Africa... it is a STRATEGIC piece of real estate... look at a map.

Religion is the current excuse. For the Romans occupying this place in the year 70 and going to war over it, it had a little to do with a challenge to empire and all to do with a TRADE ROUTE between Asia and Africa

For the Greeks, same story, different century...

For the Hicksos, same shit, different millennia

For the Egyptians of the New Kingdom, same shit different millennia

For the Assyrians

For the Babylonians...

For the Crusaders, even... the excuse was liberating the holy land, the reality was... control of a critical trade route and cutting the caliphate in half.

You get the picture...

But it has little to do with Christ, Yahweh, or Allah... very little... though for some idiots that actually matters

For most who are engaged in strategy and tactics (and control of trade routes) this matters little... so yes, indeed look at a map. Pay close attention to that map and try to connect trade routes, including the ancient salt routes that came from Africa into the Middle East and Asia.

[DS1]

45. I think both sides suck

[sam sarrha]

48. i'm pro Palestinian, they got Robbed.. but there's fault all around, if th terror element of Hamas

isn't kicked out or killed off.. there will be no peace. Hamas is a huge organization, probably the only really organized entity that gets anything done around there. they build and run schools, orphanages and hospitals, not all members of Hanas are terrorists, it is however like the Red Cross totally infiltrated by the Crips, Bloods or M14. it is apparently often the only job around.. what are ya gona do.. Israel isn't going to let any sort of economy exist there, so that means Hamas is there to stay.. that sounds like a convent excuse for Genocide.

when EVERY Palestinian family has a primary member killed and/or tortured by the Israelis and has suffered every day all their life because of them.. you have the elements of an endless cycle.

and Israel violated the truce first this time.. they assented a hamas leader, then the rockets started again

[MajorChode]

65. Hamas = Red Cross?

You're kidding, right?

I wasn't aware the Red Cross was founded by people who can only be described as paramilitary terrorists dedicated to killing their own people and others.

The only reason why Hamas builds a few schools and hospitals is because it's pretty hard to go around the world raising money in western countries for the sole purpose of killing Jews. Some might consider that bad form. It also looks better on the fliers when you put a picture of a starving child instead of an explosive belt.

Nevertheless their stated purpose is Jihad and their founding charter includes nothing less than the complete destruction of Israel. So perhaps not all of their members are terrorists, but I sure as hell wouldn't describe them as a rotary club with just a few bad apples. Hamas is nothing like the Red Cross. That would be like saying Ted Bundy is really like Mother Teresa deep down inside.

[sam sarrha]

75. you are chery picking.. i simply illustrated a situation.. bad situation, but they do have an infras...

of schools, hospitals, providing wells, they are the problem not the infrastructure. no one else has any where near what they have done there..whatever the reason. get rid of the people in hamas that are the terrorists.. not the infrastructure, its all that exists.. if anything is left by now

i find it really freepish to twist my words, i am disappointed

[MajorChode]

98. You are too easily disappointed

Perhaps you expect everyone to understand what you mean rather than what you say. I'm not sure. I didn't twist your words. You were the one that made the comparison between Hamas and Red Cross, no?

I addressed everything you posted. I didn't nitpick. I just don't happen to agree with any of it. What you propose is preposterous. It's like saying the RNC would be just fine if they could get rid of all the crooks and idiots. I really don't see how you can say you're pro Palestinian and then defend Hamas. Hamas is a murderous organization that kills Palestinians just as readily as it murders other civilians. Just because they build infrastructure, doesn't mean they aren't rotten to the core. Al-Qaeda and the Taliban build infrastructure also. They do so because they wouldn't survive as an organization if they didn't win over some hearts and minds and as I said before, they wouldn't be able to raise money through charity fronts. Furthermore, countries like Iran and Saudi Arabia would get UN sanctions slapped on them if they were funding a purely terrorist organization. So Hamas isn't building infrastructure out of the goodness of their hearts. They are doing it because they wouldn't survive as an organization if they didn't.

[sam sarrha]

99. look dick weed... i made a comparison to gangs taking over essential infrastructure...you twisted it

to illegitimately invalidate and criticize me and promote your Agenda, i described Hamas only as terrorists and a murderous gang and never said they did anything out of the kindness of their hearts..

you want war, continued death and destruction based on logic if the past

today in psychology they have turned a corner, no longer do forward looking psychologists promote "Ventilationism", the new format is..

"the Genesis of a problem has absolutely nothing to do with the Resolution of that problem"

we need an overview of the problem and new approaches that start with the people affected.. and because Islam does not use Reason.. it will take a while. longer because of people like you,
piss off

[MajorChode]

112. How rich of you.

You're nothing more than a name caller (and not even a good one at that). And you accuse me of acting like a freeper.

If your ideas had any merit, you wouldn't feel so offended at having them challenged, and you wouldn't feel the need for it. Still you provide even more evidence of this with statements like "....because Islam does not use Reason(sic)..."

[Fireweed247]

52. How can you not take sides when watching the mindless killing of innocent people?

Blaming Palestinians for the rockets from Hamas(which killed how many?) is like blaming the Iraqis for Saddam. Did the millions of innocent Iraqis need to die because we were trying to get one man?

How can you watch the Israelis dropping US provided white phosphorous on men,women and children and not take sides?
"Silence is Betrayal" MLK Jr.

[Name removed]

57. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JerseygirlCT]

67. I think you're putting aside the fact that those Palestinians elected

Hamas. There does need to be some responsibility there for their power base in Gaza now.

And are the Israeli lives lost less important?

[Fireweed247]

68. kinda like we 'elected' Bush?

:shrug:
So we deserve whatever is coming to US as a result of his actions?

[JerseygirlCT]

69. Well, I'd dispute that we actually did elect him

The USSC selected him in 2000 and I'm one who continues to believe that the 2004 election was stolen.

But given the argument on its face, yes. We - or our "elected" representative administration - have caused a great deal of strife and pain in the world. We will undoubtedly see some negative response from that.

Saying the Palestinians are not in any way responsible for Hamas just ignores the facts. Hopefully there will come a day when they get tired enough of all of this and toss them out. In a way, that's eventually what happened in No. Ireland.

[Fireweed247]

86. I don't think we elected Bush either

that was my point.

Perhaps most of the people Israel is killing do not, and never did support the actions of their government.

[dem629]

71. By the same token....

you're advocating involvement in every similar situation.

OR...you're just advocating "caring" so you can talk about something to show others you care.

[Fireweed247]

85. I'm not advocating involvement in anything

I think we should stop providing monetary and military support of Israel.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. I'm on the side of the people killed and maimed by "leaders" who always have rationales for killing.

“What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy.” - Gandhi

[Fireweed247]

56. exactly!

great quote!

[TahitiNut]

62. Ditto.

:fistbump:

[dem629]

72. And what are you doing about it?

[Name removed]

59. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BuyingThyme]

63. Umm...

Welcome to DU!

:hi:

[alarimer]

64. A pox on both their houses.

But it is an asymmetrical conflict. Israel has more firepower and can do the most damage and they don't seem to give shit how many children they kill. They really suck. Hamas only sucks a little less, being major supporters of terrorism. But when you are being blockaded and starved, what choice do you really have? We need to withdraw all military and financial aid to Israel until they stop this shit. Fuck them. Actually fuck them both.

And all of it is over which group their imaginary sky being likes the best.

[JerseygirlCT]

66. I mostly agree

Disagree that this is religious squabbling, though.

Anytime religion is brought up as a cause here, it's ignored that religion is just one piece of a very, very complex situation. Blaming it on, and writing it off as, simply a religious "squabble" diminishes the very serious situation there, and ignores the very complicated history of the area. It also wades into some of the same territory as those who are virulently partisan on the issue live in - simplifying an anything but simple situation.

The problem is it's all complex, it's all nuanced, as you say, there's blame aplenty to go around - going back centuries.

If the solution demands an accounting for all of that history, chances are small there will ever be peace. I think we've got to start from the here and now in some sense and work carefully to craft a peace that all can live with. At least I hope there's still some chance of that in the future.

[Charlie16]

74. It's not about religion. It's about LAND n/t

[JerseygirlCT]

97. Yes

Land and security.

[sendero]

73. Only morons...

.. cannot see that neither side is acting with honor, they are both despicable.

[sam sarrha]

77. the Genesis of a problem has absolutely nothing to do with its Resolution. till they figure that out

there will be no peace..

the people keeping the hate flowing know that, and profit from it

[sam sarrha]

76. people take sides because they want to avoid an "Over View" that could resolve the situation

[treestar]

79. I agree, though I would add the media never gives the Palestinian side

And so I appear to be taking their side, but am only trying to get it out there.

But I've lost patience with all of them, and think the UN should just go in there and take over for all of them. I've no sympathy left for either side, excepting the Palestinians who get blamed for the acts of their extremists and killed for the mere crime of being Palestinian.

As for the Israelis, I am completely out of patience. They should be taken over by the UN or some other neutral organization, and along with the Palestinians, made to follow that organization's directives to live like civilized people.

The rest of us have put up with this crap for long enough. We don't effing care. Just quit killing each other based on race/ethnic group.

If they can do it in Northern Ireland, they can do it there.

[Skittles]

80. I agree

both sides make me sick

[Pavulon]

81. Bingo, No one is special here.

they need to be pressured to agree to terms they will accept. 2 state solution in some form. Harsh realities will be laid out. It will be a loss for both.

All the people pimping their side prolong this. It will not be settled with force.

[Runcible Spoon]

84. holy shit I'm shocked this hasn't gotten shoved down into the I/P dungeon

I can't for the life of me understand why I/P discussions need to get stashed away in their own little forum. with extra rules.

[IsItJustMe]

100. Me neither. It seems to stifle honest discussion of a very important topic that may bring about WW3

Seems important.

[Fireweed247]

87. It is not about religion and it is not supported by the people

Amid cries of "Jews and Arabs refuse to be enemies!" and banners reading, "Enough!" thousands of Israelis took to the streets of Tel Aviv on Saturday night to protest against the country's war on Gaza.

"It is a cynical war, for political reasons and people are very much aware of that."

Thousands rally in Tel Aviv
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4761069

They are just using the idea that they are 'protecting the people' for their own political purposes, kinda like the Bush Administration's attack on Iraq and attack on our civil liberties here at home.

[anonymous171]

89. I would like it if we could sit back and watch. Unfortunately, America is already involved.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Chulanowa]

94. Western ideals...

Such as denouncing an entire human population as "bronze age savages" and further using that claim as rationale for killing lots of 'em?

The ironic thing is that you're saying that shit like you're some great defender of progressive thought. Please do tell us your musings on the spearchuckers and slopeheads, too, oh mouthpeice of enlightenment.

[Eryemil]

96. I could care less about 'progressive thought'.

Most of my views are liberal: feminism, abortion, euthanasia, secularism, death penalty, gay rights, animal welfare, environmentalism and some others.

A few however are conservative and rather unpopular in this crowd: Gun ownership, affirmative action and funnily enough my secularism yet again. I doubt many would think of this as a conservative viewpoint but it can seem like it sometimes.

I basically believe that Islam as it is practiced in most of these countries (Palestinian territories included) is incompatible with western culture. We've fought too long and hard to stomp down our Christian crazies to be influenced by yet another group of nuts.

The state of Israel certainly fails to attain my ideal but no country is perfect. It is still light years ahead of anything the Palestinians would put in its place.

And by the way
"...and further using that claim as rationale for killing lots of 'em?"

Have I at any moment or in any way said that I would like to see Palestinians killed?

[Chulanowa]

104. Within the context of the question asked, yes, you did

Given the current situation, victory for Israel means lots of dead Palestinians - the reverse is also true. Especially giving your fucking bigoted attitude. Bronze age savages who are inherently incompatible with "the west" and all.

Can you define "Western Culture" for me? I've been waiting twelve long goddamn years for someone, anyone, to actually define this term without sounding like they're covered in Klan Rally flopsweat.

Can you also please explain in detail how Palestinians practice Islam, because, y'know, I've been watching how various cultures and nations practice this religion for a while now, seeing as how I came really really close to converting myself and the faith still fascinates me greatly, and I can't really see how it's immediately incompatable with that mysterious Western Culture.

[Gwendolyn]

107. It isn't the religion itself. It's the cultural differences that people are really referring to.

The place of women in such societies versus those of westernized countries is really the biggie.

[Chulanowa]

108. It's not, really

There are large legal differences, but in practice? Women in the west get fucked over just as much as women in the middle east. Abused just as often, raped just as often, and denied their inherent rights just as often. Why do you think our media makes such a huge fucking flap about women having to wear head-coverings in most Islamic nations, rather than actual violations?

Because those same violations also happen and go unpunished every single day in America, the only difference is that the Muslim woman has a scarf around her head.

[Gwendolyn]

111. Yes, it's the legal differences, and the fact that it's condoned by larger society.

Women are screwed over every day, that's true, but it isn't condoned (at least not within the last thirty to fifty years). The crimes are seen as free agent acts, and are deplored, not approved of by our government and culture. Men aren't viewed as heros for killing their family members, women aren't punished with death for the crime of being raped, people are not executed for committing adultery or their sexual orientation, and the wearing of head and body schmatas are regarded as the idiotic expressions of female servitude that they are, dogs aren't considered vermin, etc. These are fundamental differences and result in culture clashes when there is a meeting of the minds, west and east. Sorry if you can't see that or wish to deny it.

[Hissyspit]

91. I'm on the side of not slaughtering innocent human beings.

Didn't Israel just issue a report criticizing itself for overreaction in the attacks on Lebanon?

Wars of religion are really wars of power.

[Chulanowa]

93. For what it's worth, I blame the British

The Israel-Palestine conflict is just another clusterfuck in the grand scheme of salting the fields of every brown-skinned colonial holding possible.

[StudsT]

95. this is not ancient this is modern day apartheid, and i choose to support the oppressed

and so it goes...

StudsT

[Avalux]

101. Assigning blame does no good and is not the way to peaceful resolution.

The killing of innocent civilians on either side is unacceptable and must stop. But does either side want peace? If an agreement was reached, there would be no need for Hamas to exist and the Likud party would no longer have a purpose.

Right now, I am furious our government - and that includes prominent Democrats - are not condemning the actions of both sides and urging a cease fire without sounding like a 5 year old demanding Hamas stop first.

[Malikshah]

103. People take sides when they read the history. There is no equivalency here. This is not

by any means ancient religious sqabbling. It is a creation of the 20th century that has been allowed to continue.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

105. Because being reasonable is hard.

Peacemaking is difficult. Taking a strong position from your comfy armchair, that's dead easy.

[Marr]

106. I agree with you.

I can't identify with either side in a war or religious lunacy. However, religious bullshit aside-- I sympathize with the Palestinians in that they are living in a kind of apartheid.

There are humanitarian issues here that I can appreciate. All the religious claims to the land are impossible for me to sympathize with on either side.

[mmonk]

109. Money. American foreign policy is based on killing for money.

[AtomicKitten]

113. There is no easy solution, but I completely agree side-taking makes peace-brokering impossible. nt