07-23-2003, 09:25 AM
"Maybe I misunderstoof him but he never said Israel should be given as much latitude as possible, he's trying to show you that the so called oppression of the Palestinians is an act trying to defend Israeli civilians and not simply trying to kill Palestinians"
Read his reply to me. Considering his arguments, can you say that is not precisely what he is arguing? Yes, it's dressed up very nicely in all sorts of strongly worded phrases and excuses for everything the Israelis have ever done. Reading his post, one would wonder if they are a nation state, or just a flight of misunderstood angels walking the earth, stoically sharing a land with the worst humanity has to offer.
Yet, since the Palestinians are terrorists (can a bankrupt non-state have a standing army?) and the Israelis are the legitimate rulers of the region excersizing their power, he is arguing for exactly what I said: The Israelis are not and should not be restrained in their power by anything but their goodwill. Perhaps, with his rather extreme version of events (not supported even by open statements of hawkish Israeli leaders, let alone a more balanced account of events), this is more than enough.
I don't think so. I don't think most people in the world think so. The UN certainly doesn't. And, perhaps most importantly, the Palestinians absolutely, positively, not-in-twenty-thousand-years-for-twenty-thousand-virgins-in-the-afterlife will not accept any road to peace that starts from anywhere near there.
So, unless one is willing to accept the annhilation of the Palestinians as the fundamental precondition to peace, Mr. Spectre's position is, at best, correct but completely impractical. At worst, it is the opinion that has kept the dead piling up since the founding of Israel.
Jester
Read his reply to me. Considering his arguments, can you say that is not precisely what he is arguing? Yes, it's dressed up very nicely in all sorts of strongly worded phrases and excuses for everything the Israelis have ever done. Reading his post, one would wonder if they are a nation state, or just a flight of misunderstood angels walking the earth, stoically sharing a land with the worst humanity has to offer.
Yet, since the Palestinians are terrorists (can a bankrupt non-state have a standing army?) and the Israelis are the legitimate rulers of the region excersizing their power, he is arguing for exactly what I said: The Israelis are not and should not be restrained in their power by anything but their goodwill. Perhaps, with his rather extreme version of events (not supported even by open statements of hawkish Israeli leaders, let alone a more balanced account of events), this is more than enough.
I don't think so. I don't think most people in the world think so. The UN certainly doesn't. And, perhaps most importantly, the Palestinians absolutely, positively, not-in-twenty-thousand-years-for-twenty-thousand-virgins-in-the-afterlife will not accept any road to peace that starts from anywhere near there.
So, unless one is willing to accept the annhilation of the Palestinians as the fundamental precondition to peace, Mr. Spectre's position is, at best, correct but completely impractical. At worst, it is the opinion that has kept the dead piling up since the founding of Israel.
Jester