Israel rejects "Hope and Change"

[JoeB131]

Lots of differences. We fight according to Geneva convention rules (unfortunately). Maybe you need to take a look at ISIS. That is pure and true Islam.

We do? Because what we are doing at Gitmo violates MOST of the Geneva Conventions.

You really are fucking stupid, aren't you?

 

[ChrisL]

Nope, there is a clear difference between a terrorist and a "freedom fighter." Terrorists target the innocent.

No, there really isn't. Probably because "innocent' are usually in the eye of the beholder.

So when we dropped atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, where there were a lot of "innocent" women and children, were we "Terrorists"? From the Japanese perspective, we were.

You keep bringing up ANCIENT history. Not relevant to today. Also, the Japanese were the instigators in that war. They were trying to conquer.

 

[ChrisL]

Lots of differences. We fight according to Geneva convention rules (unfortunately). Maybe you need to take a look at ISIS. That is pure and true Islam.

We do? Because what we are doing at Gitmo violates MOST of the Geneva Conventions.

You really are fucking stupid, aren't you?

Those are POWs.

 

[JoeB131]

You keep bringing up ANCIENT history. Not relevant to today. Also, the Japanese were the instigators in that war. They were trying to conquer.

The women and children in Hiroshima weren't trying to conquer anyone. they were just living their lives. We deliberately left Hiroshima alone so we could see what this bomb would do to people.

I mean, shit, that's the definition of terrorism.

 

[ChrisL]

Lots of differences. We fight according to Geneva convention rules (unfortunately). Maybe you need to take a look at ISIS. That is pure and true Islam.

We do? Because what we are doing at Gitmo violates MOST of the Geneva Conventions.

You really are fucking stupid, aren't you?

Terrorists or Freedom Fighters What s the Difference Acton Institute

Excerpt:

Terrorists are less concerned with acquisition than they are with destruction. They are usually clever enough to cloak their motives by hijacking the popular will of an oppressed people, but their wrath is not appeased when they acquire what they say they want. For example, would the war against Israel be over once the Palestinians got their own homeland? Most likely it would not. The real goal of terrorist groups is not acquiring but destroying. Terrorism is thus qualitatively different from armed movement for freedom and liberty. Terrorism is not like greed; it is an extreme form of destructive envy.

The September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon were acts of terrorism. Though the acts were ostensibly cries for help for the Palestinians, there was no strategic military purpose involved. The attack was pure destruction, an act designed for one end–terror.

Recognizing this difference will help us to refrain from trying to "understand" the terrorists or giving their acts any nobility or value. The willful destruction of the World Trade Center with the loss of over 4,000 people does not deserve such noble sentiment.

Envy can be neither sanctioned nor understood. It is a hateful attitude that, when played out, results in evil, destructive acts. It is a nihilistic poison that corrodes the soul of the one who envies and endangers the well-being of the envied. The same is true of terrorism. Terrorists will never be satisfied until the object of their hatred is destroyed.

Facing off with these nihilistic forces of terror is a frightening task, no doubt. Failing, however, to make appropriate moral distinctions about the true nature and motivation of our enemy strengthens the terrorist cause all the more. In this ongoing confrontation with evil, engaging in this type of moral equivocation is not something that our nation can afford to do.

 

[ChrisL]

You keep bringing up ANCIENT history. Not relevant to today. Also, the Japanese were the instigators in that war. They were trying to conquer.

The women and children in Hiroshima weren't trying to conquer anyone. they were just living their lives. We deliberately left Hiroshima alone so we could see what this bomb would do to people.

I mean, shit, that's the definition of terrorism.

They were casualties of war. Yes, war has consequences.

 

[JoeB131]

Those are POWs.

If POW's, we shouldn't be torturing them.

We should allow inspectors from neutral countries to inspect their conditions.

We should not ask any information of them other than Name, Rank, Serial Number and Date of birth.

And we should not be holding them after hostilities have ended.

It would also be nice if we could prove they are who we claim they are.

 

[JoeB131]

They were casualties of war. Yes, war has consequences.

So why are you whining about 9/11? Wars have consequences.

 

[ChrisL]

They were casualties of war. Yes, war has consequences.

So why are you whining about 9/11? Wars have consequences.

That wasn't war. It was an act of terror.

 

[ChrisL]

Gotta go, Joe. Dinner time!

 

[JoeB131]

That wasn't war. It was an act of terror.

Again- word games. We've been killing Muslims for 30 years before 9-11. I'd call that an act of War.

 

[irosie91]

Interesting that people bring up the "Crusades" though, a time in history when everything was completely different than today. People and times were much more violent. None of that excuses the savages that follow Islam.

Actually, back then, the Muslims acted more humanely than the Christians did.

When Christians took Jerusalem in 1099, they slaughtered everyone in the city. Muslim, Jew and Christian alike.

When Saladin took the city back in 1180, he not only didn't slaughter the Christians, he allowed them to leave, only demanding ransoms for the wealthier crusaders still living there.

Also, when you get to talking about 'Savage", we killed more Afghans and Iraqis than they killed of us. Are we not 'Savage" because we use plans and drones to do our killing?

An interesting factoid of history is SALA'ADIN was not an arab----he was
a KURD. As such a far more moderate
person than were arab muslims. In fact
like the kurds of today----he got along with
jews. His personal physician was MAIMONIDES----who fled the violence of
arab muslims in CORDOBA, SPAIN and LATER in MOROCCO. to Egypt where
Sala'adin had control. Citing Sala'adin as an example of "something better"---is fine-----however he was somewhat exceptional. I believe ----not sure----that at some point during the crusades---
Sala'adin and Richard the lion hearted---engaged in some sort of peace negotiations

 

[eagle1462010]

You keep bringing up ANCIENT history. Not relevant to today. Also, the Japanese were the instigators in that war. They were trying to conquer.

The women and children in Hiroshima weren't trying to conquer anyone. they were just living their lives. We deliberately left Hiroshima alone so we could see what this bomb would do to people.

I mean, shit, that's the definition of terrorism.

We were at War with Japan..............They attacked us..............

When you go to War you kill or make the enemy submit...........they didn't submit so those 2 cities got the mushroom cloud, and it ended the War..............We killed Far more than that when we used incendiaries on other cities...............

They shouldn't have started a fight with us................They chose to, so they died.............That's WAR Mr. BS artist.

 

[eagle1462010]

And again JOE, the Crusades were a result of Muslim Invasions after Mohammed..............Trying to implement his goals for his new religion..................

Which of course you will ignore as usual.

 

[eagle1462010]

To the DNA and genetics argument...............People of all cultures, locations, and throughout all of history have been getting it on..........It's not hard to believe that certain cultures have similar DNA because men and women have been getting it on since the cavement.

WE ARE ALL MUTTS..............Get over it.

 

[JoeB131]

An interesting factoid of history is SALA'ADIN was not an arab----he was
a KURD.... s

Completely irrelevent to the point I was making, but okay.

 

[JoeB131]

And again JOE, the Crusades were a result of Muslim Invasions after Mohammed..............Trying to implement his goals for his new religion..................

Which of course you will ignore as usual.

Yeah, guy, if it takes you 400 years to react to an "invasion", then you probably aren't reacting to an invasion.

I mean, I guess I should react to that invasion by English People to America, then, being Cherokee and all....

 

[ChrisL]

To the DNA and genetics argument...............People of all cultures, locations, and throughout all of history have been getting it on..........It's not hard to believe that certain cultures have similar DNA because men and women have been getting it on since the cavement.

WE ARE ALL MUTTS..............Get over it.

To WHOM are you talking? Obviously, a lot of you do not understand the implications of the genetic testing that was done, and don't even THINK of telling me what to do.

 

[JoeB131]

We were at War with Japan..............They attacked us..............

Okay, the United States Attacked the Islamic World- or parts of it, anyway. So what's your complaint again?

When you go to War you kill or make the enemy submit...........they didn't submit so those 2 cities got the mushroom cloud, and it ended the War..............We killed Far more than that when we used incendiaries on other cities...............

Yes, we did. And it was completely unnecessary since the Japanese were willing to negotiate for peace at that point. But a good thing we gave in on the sticking points before the Russians took ALL the prizes.

They shouldn't have started a fight with us................They chose to, so they died.............That's WAR Mr. BS artist.

Okay. We shouldn't have supported Zionism and bombed Arab countries. We chose to, and some people died for it. That's War, Mr. BS Artist.

 

[ChrisL]

That wasn't war. It was an act of terror.

Again- word games. We've been killing Muslims for 30 years before 9-11. I'd call that an act of War.

What Muslims are those? And post a link.