On 13-Jan-09, at 7:54 PM, Francis Drouillard wrote: > On Jan 12, 2009, at 3:11 PM, Michael Luscombe wrote: > >> I'm having trouble commenting on this respectfully. > > Tell me about it. Your ignorance of the affair is stunning. --
Aye. Since my views don't match yours, I'm clearly missing something significant. >> Israel is not taking the moral high road. They are punching giant >> holes in their glass walls, through which generations of Muslims will >> justify their continued harassment on all sides. > > Israel is defending itself. Period. There's only so many unanswered > suicide bombers, Kassam rockets and Israeli civilian deaths you can > accept before taking action. > >> Both sides of this conflict are morally grey. > > Only if you consider concern for your survival "morally grey." > Otherwise it's abundantly clear. -- Deaths since the start of this conflict: Palestinian: 971 Israeli: 13 >> They always have been. >> Both sides sit on sins they would not forgive themselves. There is no >> honor in victory here for either. >> >> Resolving conflict requires compromise. >> Compromise means greeting >> guns with compassion. It means being vulnerable. If you haven't made >> yourself vulnerable, then you haven't sacrificed anything, you >> haven't compromised anything. > > Easy for you to say, particularly when you place such a low value > on innocent Israeli lives. -- Hyperbole. >> As long as the primary concern of both sides is looking tough and >> seeking retribution, there will be no peace, no end to the death and >> conflict, no end to the moral transgression. > > There will be no peace until romantic dreams like yours are > replaced with a realism that addresses Hamas' goal of obliterating > Israel and Israel's goal of survival. -- Thank goodness these idiots are all going to stick to their guns so we can see how your view plays out on CNN. >> Taking the moral high ground is hard because it makes you feel weak. >> It requires one to look past ego, and to take a different perspective >> on what strength means. > > It makes you mortally vulnerable, too. But hey, when preserving > life and limb isn't a concern, you do have a great deal of room to > implement silly methods, particularly when they're failure doesn't > affect you. -- Yeah, looking weak sucks. Thanks for making that point. >> Wasn't there a guy you like that said the same thing? Good thing they >> nailed him to that cross, or I'm sure he'd still be spouting that >> pansy shit. > > Even he only had 4 cheeks. > > There are aspects of this war that you don't seem to recognize. > > #1 - Iran is testing of Obama. So far, he's done the right thing. > Better for him and the US if the war is resolved during the Bush > Administration. He needs to play his cards close to his chest when > dealing with the mullahs. > > #2 - Note the relative silence of the Arab states. (The states not > the streets, meaning the government not the people.) The worry > those pesky Persian Shia mullahs will ruin their Sunni fun. > Translation -- the Arab states secretly want Israel to win. > > Now, take this war forward a bit. Hamas, supported by Iran, is > defeated in a fledgling Arab nation. That's a big deal on the Arab > streets. > > There's a power vacuum in Gaza. Fatah will take over, bringing the > West Bank and Gaza under one government again. > > Israel will be under immense foreign (and domestic) pressure to > improve conditions for Palestinians in Gaza, which they will gladly > due with Mahmoud Abbas at the helm of Fatah. > > If Abbas uses Fatah resources to improve the lives of Palestinians, > Israel may be asked to recognize Palestine as an independent > country. If Fatah can contain terrorist acts against Israel for 5 > years, Israel will have to recognize Palestine as an independent > state. In my opinion. > > The key is that the Arabs (and Persians) must stop other Arabs from > attacking Isreal. That is how to end the fighting. -- Why is it that the two points you extrapolate from are just your guesses based on no actual action from Iran or Arab states. Muslim states don't back up their comrades. Muslim states are looking forward to an entirely dead Palestinian nation of Martyrs they can use to strengthen their crazy suicide brigade, while avoiding any direct conflict with the US or democratic nations. The fall of the tiny and useless nation of Palestine will have no effect on Iran or other muslim nations, other than strengthening their self-vicitmization. I don't disagree with your potential future state there. If Hamas leaves, that may indeed be what happens. Note that Palestinians largely voted Fatah out during the last election. Their return may just feel like the will of Israel, and the whole thing will start over again with a new angry terrorist movement. How would the next government in Gaza succeed where Fatah did not? > Say, have you watched the video of the Hamas terrorist snatching a > Palestinian boy for use as a human shield? I found it rather > disturbing. Perhaps you will, too: > > <http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2009/01/022544.php> -- http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/09/zeitoun.gaza.israel/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/12/white.phosphorus/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/12/gaza.aid.diary/index.html There are horror stories on both sides of the conflict. Neither side is playing "fair", and both sides see it as a necessary evil. -- Michael --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "StrataList-OT" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/StrataList-OT?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
