By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - What can be done with Isreal? Realistically!

Kasz216 on 16 November 2012
fordy said:
Kasz216 said:
fordy said:
Kasz216 said:
fordy said:
Kasz216 said:

First off.  You clearly didn't read my post, at least not correctly.   Secondly, you didn't read your own post.  I'd suggest going back and rereading them... but to put it succinctly.

There are groups in the UN that specifically vote against everything the US votes for, no matter how petty.  That's not an assumption.  There support never changed really.  It was mostly anti-american because it was the cold war.  Then when the cold war stopped.  Most of those nations were still pretty anti-american.

Secondly, Europe has nothing to do with being anti-american.  That was a completely different point... the shift with Europe was mostly due to demografic changes.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/28/opinion/sunday/europes-trouble-with-jews.html?pagewanted=all

Is a simple enough primer.

 

Thirdly, you said their methods were getting more extreme.  Not their land grabbing.  Their methods have been muted as of late.   Espeically muted as they lost support.  

Additionally, when they unilaterally pulled back and shut down a number of settlements.   They were losing support.


So your assumptions on these points are both wrong.   You've made far more assumptions then I have.


You're making an illogical conclusion based on visible results. It's like looking at a black box, inputting a few tests and then coming to the unreasonable conclusion that it's a logical NOT operator, without any thoughts towards the inner workings of the black box. The results say that said states have always voted against America. Does that mean they will ALWAYS vote against them in all stances, or the fact that the inputs observes happen to coincidentally cause a conflict in opinion? To say the state is a simple logical NOT operator is the same as saying the state is simple.

On the European front, this is the classic retort to any criticism of Israel; just call them anti-Semetic. Ignore the fact that the left consistently denounces all sorts of opression, including the holocaust. Once again, it's the black box fallacy. Anything coming out that doesn't support Israel is anti-Semetic. It doesn't matter about the inner workings that determined the outcome. 

Oh, so you do agree that, as a response to loss of support, their settlement rate has dropped? Don't you think that there is some kind of logic behind that, and not just "well let's see if we get support back by stopping this". There would most likely have been foreign communication as to WHY they have lost support, and acted accordingly. You pretty much just admitted that there was most likely a shift in support against Israel BECAUSE of the settlements.

You obviously don't understand the concepts of how logic and predictability coincide. Allow me to explain. Your assumptions occured at the top level, so in other words, the assumption had to bridge a bigger gap. My assumptions involve plotting known facts, decaying a hop to it's own reasoning and working recursively from there. So in other words, while I may have made a few assumptions to your one, the distance of my total assumption is a lot less, since yours spanned the initial reason to begin with. You already agreed that support was being lost from Israel. You just admitted then that, as of late the rate of occupation has been decreasing, most likely bacause of lost support (you said it, not me). Join the pieces we know, don't just jump over the whole issue with one mere assumption.

Except the problem is.  You aren't using known facts.   Your base assumptions are incorrect the data your putting in is incorrect.

Again Israel's largest losses of support in europe have been most recently.   Actually around the times where it pulled back on settlments and have been more moderate in nature.

The new push for settlements has really only happened since loss of that support.

 

The new changes to extreme actions have actuallly been a response to losing that support when they "do everything right."


Except they aren't doing everything right, or else we wouldn't be talking about this.

To add to it, I merely gave settlements as an EXAMPLE. It could have been any multitude of things that conflicts with foreign policy of said states, but surely you're not backing up the claim that "the muslims are infiltrating Western europe" as a sound cause over that, are you?


Not currently they aren't.  However, again, read the post.  They WERE doing everything right.  In 2005.  What they got was cooling attitudes towards them and rockets fired at them from hamas.  There policies at the time were overly concealtaroy, and it made no difference.

As for "muslims infilitraiting western europe" that's a hilariously drastic and strawman way to say "Natural immigration changing political opinioons".  The only arabic people i know who support Israel are Catholics.

All it takes is the GOP's slowly but surely changes and soon final change in illegal immigration, or the Democrats change before it... to see the effects an immigrating population's ability to change policy.


My original gripe was your quote regarding "other states are for Palestine because it's anti-American", but in terms of natural immigration changing political options, this is, in a way, referring to other states' foreign policies. However, it seems a little too coincidental that said states would develop an opposition towards Israel at the same time because their stances changed at the same time. Besides, are you telling me that these immigrants are moving to western Europe, seizing power there and using it to denounce Israel? What percentage of immigration is required for such a feat.....across all western european nations?

I have an idea what you're going to say next, but my suggestion is, tread lightly. Don't go making any kind of statements that can translate to western european nations as being idiots or anything...

You keep repeating things that are patenetly false... i'm unsure why this is the case.

Most states who are anti israel (Aka non Europeon) once again didn't change their stances.  They were mostly anti-israel from the start... and it was largely part of one of those Cold War Chess movees nobody should of cared aout but everybody thought would decide the fat of the world.

 

As for Europe... there policies also haven't changed "all together".   Some countries opinions changed before others.

As for what kind of immigrant population is needed to change opinion on Israel?   Not much.  Largely because almost nobody really cares strongly about Israel.  Just a big enough voting population to be notable.

Lets look at the counter example for numbers.

The big supporters of Israel in the US are super rightwing evangelicals right?  It's not like they're a serious part of the population that most people even bother to listen to.  Even most righwing people roll their eyes at evangelicals.   Yet they effect Israel policy.

 

As for Western europe being idiots.  Not sure where you'd get that from... Europe is just playing to it's more invested demographic, due to the majority of the population not really giving a shit and more or less just sick of the situation and mildly impatient.



Around the Network
fordy on 16 November 2012
Kasz216 said:
fordy said:
Kasz216 said:
fordy said:
Kasz216 said:
fordy said:
Kasz216 said:


Yes.  People do it all the time.  Or was the point you were trying to make an equally stupid comment?


If three British guys driving cars with left leaning slogans couldn't make it 30km into Alabama without being chased out, I'd REALLY like to see evidence to people doing this "all the time".


There are 31 mosques in Alabama.  Some of which are in fact more othrdox mosques.  I'd guess that most of their attendee's haven't been shot. 


You missed the original point, which was despite laws to protect religious institutions in highly fundamentalist areas, there is still going to be the one religious whackjob out there to do something to the contrary, whether it's Alabama OR Tehran.


Except... I didn't.  Again your either not reading or intentionally strawmaning.

Note the bolded part in my above statement.  If that was your original point then your answer to the avove question should of been "Yes I was trying to say something equally stupid."

Instead though it just sounds more like you were being serious and are now trying to bail.

Nope. The way you said it was that I was being just as ignorant to the fact, when in fact it was to highlight the bigot's stupidity through means of role reversal.

Saying "trying to make an equally stupid comment" means something different altogether...

You mean... role reversal by intentionally trying to say something equally stupid?

 

A lot of your problems in this thread seem to be caused by a lack of reading things.


Equally OUTRAGEOUS is a better fitting term...

 

A lot of your problems in this thread seem to be caused by a lack of proper context. Stupidity behind a reply would imply that the reply had, for instance, no relevance to the subject at all. The reply had proper relevance.



Kasz216 on 16 November 2012
fordy said:
Kasz216 said:
fordy said:

Nope. The way you said it was that I was being just as ignorant to the fact, when in fact it was to highlight the bigot's stupidity through means of role reversal.

Saying "trying to make an equally stupid comment" means something different altogether...

You mean... role reversal by intentionally trying to say something equally stupid?

 

A lot of your problems in this thread seem to be caused by a lack of reading things.


Equally OUTRAGEOUS is a better fitting term...

 

A lot of your problems in this thread seem to be caused by a lack of proper context. Stupidity behind a reply would imply that the reply had, for instance, no relevance to the subject at all. The reply had proper relevance.


No... stupitidy behind a reply would imply that what you said was stupid.  Which it was.

I... don't even know how to better explain it.  I mean... I'd link to a dictionary definition of Stupidity but that just feels like it'd be insulting.

At this point i hope your just trolling because otherwise... it's just embarrising.



Icy-Zone on 16 November 2012

The Israelis are bullying the Arabs, and are given sympathy by the West, because they claim that Jewish people occupied that land from ancient times. Why else would they be granted land in that specific region of the world, right?

But why did the West support, so adamantly, the creation of Israel, which divided an already established nation right down the middle? We all know that America would never create a nation inside it's borders for all the Native Americans, that divided America's East from West. There has to be a motive behind all of this that isn't transparent for us to see.

It's really sad to people getting upset over other people's comments, only because they were not "politically correct." With that said, let me say this: I believe that America and Israel are worse than the Nazis. Not only have they committed some of the most heinous global atrocities in this age (many mimicking how the Nazis treated the Jews), but they've also done it sneakily, and are very underhanded. At least the Nazis were up front about their crimes.



"Common sense is not so common." - Voltaire

Platinumed Destiny, Vanquish, Ninja Gaiden Sigma Plus, Catherine, and Metal Gear Rising. Get on my level!!


Get your Portable ID!                                                                                     

Kasz216 on 16 November 2012
Icy-Zone said:
The Israelis are bullying the Arabs, and are given sympathy by the West, because they claim that Jewish people occupied that land from ancient times. Why else would they be granted land in that specific region of the world, right?

But why did the West support, so adamantly, the creation of Israel, which divided an already established nation right down the middle? We all know that America would never create a nation inside it's borders for all the Native Americans, that divided America's East from West. There has to be a motive behind all of this that isn't transparent for us to see.

It's really sad to people getting upset over other people's comments, only because they were not "politically correct." With that said, let me say this: I believe that America and Israel are worse than the Nazis. Not only have they committed some of the most heinous global atrocities in this age (many mimicking how the Nazis treated the Jews), but they've also done it sneakily, and are very underhanded. At least the Nazis were up front about their crimes.

There was no already established nation...

depending on your point of view, there either never existed a Palestine or Palestine was first created in 1988.

 

Palestinians got the short end of the stick long before Israel ever showed up, or westerners for that reason.

Quebec would be a better example

the afore mentioned Norgono-Karabagh is a must more relevent example.

It's really so similar the only reason it's not mentioned is nobody knows shit about it.



Around the Network
fordy on 16 November 2012
Kasz216 said:

You keep repeating things that are patenetly false... i'm unsure why this is the case.

Most states who are anti israel (Aka non Europeon) once again didn't change their stances.  They were mostly anti-israel from the start... and it was largely part of one of those Cold War Chess movees nobody should of cared aout but everybody thought would decide the fat of the world.

 

As for Europe... there policies also haven't changed "all together".   Some countries opinions changed before others.

As for what kind of immigrant population is needed to change opinion on Israel?   Not much.  Largely because almost nobody really cares strongly about Israel.  Just a big enough voting population to be notable.

Lets look at the counter example for numbers.

The big supporters of Israel in the US are super rightwing evangelicals right?  It's not like they're a serious part of the population that most people even bother to listen to.  Even most righwing people roll their eyes at evangelicals.   Yet they effect Israel policy.

 

As for Western europe being idiots.  Not sure where you'd get that from... Europe is just playing to it's more invested demographic, due to the majority of the population not really giving a shit and more or less just sick of the situation and mildly impatient.

Yes, you've mentioned the Cold War thing a dozen times. The fact of the matter is that it has no relevance on the matter anymore. The Kremlin is not influencing these state's decisions anymore, and the fact that they're still against Israel could just be coincidental, or from cultural similarities. To say that these states cannot think for themselves in terms of foreign policy is, as I mentioned, insulting.

Now on the stance of Western Europe. Take, for example, a country that has say 2% of western immigrants. By your reasoning above, that would make 2% for Palestine, and 98% who don't give a shit. Would that be enough to constitue a stance of "well we must be for Palestine"? Keep in mind that these countries are still allies to America, despite disagreeing on this.

America itself is a different story altogether. To the outside viewer, there seems to be a lot of "dancing around" the issue. I am not entirely sure why that is. I have been told that it's to keep America's Jewish population happy, and that they have enough numbers to swing an election, but I'm skeptical about that. All that I know is that if ANYONE journalistic in America that raises a slight doubt about Israel's actions, they seem to go through the tar & feather line and never heard from in public again. Quite an interesting stance for a country that champions free speech in order to collect all facets of an argument.

It seems impossible to criticise Israel and NOT be an anti-semite.



fordy on 16 November 2012
Kasz216 said:


No... stupitidy behind a reply would imply that what you said was stupid.  Which it was.

I... don't even know how to better explain it.  I mean... I'd link to a dictionary definition of Stupidity but that just feels like it'd be insulting.

At this point i hope your just trolling because otherwise... it's just embarrising.

I'm going to put this use down to loss in cultural translation, but quite frankly, you seem more offended about my statement of a similarity happpening in the US via role reversal than the bigot did! I honestly hope you're not thinking that it could NEVER happen there?



MrBubbles on 16 November 2012
Icy-Zone said:
The Israelis are bullying the Arabs, and are given sympathy by the West, because they claim that Jewish people occupied that land from ancient times. Why else would they be granted land in that specific region of the world, right?

But why did the West support, so adamantly, the creation of Israel, which divided an already established nation right down the middle? We all know that America would never create a nation inside it's borders for all the Native Americans, that divided America's East from West. There has to be a motive behind all of this that isn't transparent for us to see.

It's really sad to people getting upset over other people's comments, only because they were not "politically correct." With that said, let me say this: I believe that America and Israel are worse than the Nazis. Not only have they committed some of the most heinous global atrocities in this age (many mimicking how the Nazis treated the Jews), but they've also done it sneakily, and are very underhanded. At least the Nazis were up front about their crimes.

 

 

 

cry to me some more about how the obese gazans dont get to eat 20 cheeseburgers at every meal you degenerate slimeball, then crawl back to whatever cesspit you crawled from.



"I like my steaks how i like my women.  Bloody and all over my face"

"Its like sex, but with a winner!"

MrBubbles Review Threads: Bill Gates, Jak II, Kingdom Hearts II, The Strangers, Sly 2, Crackdown, Zohan, Quarantine, Klungo Sssavesss Teh World, MS@E3'08, WATCHMEN(movie), Shadow of the Colossus, The Saboteur

Kasz216 on 16 November 2012
fordy said:
Kasz216 said:

You keep repeating things that are patenetly false... i'm unsure why this is the case.

Most states who are anti israel (Aka non Europeon) once again didn't change their stances.  They were mostly anti-israel from the start... and it was largely part of one of those Cold War Chess movees nobody should of cared aout but everybody thought would decide the fat of the world.

 

As for Europe... there policies also haven't changed "all together".   Some countries opinions changed before others.

As for what kind of immigrant population is needed to change opinion on Israel?   Not much.  Largely because almost nobody really cares strongly about Israel.  Just a big enough voting population to be notable.

Lets look at the counter example for numbers.

The big supporters of Israel in the US are super rightwing evangelicals right?  It's not like they're a serious part of the population that most people even bother to listen to.  Even most righwing people roll their eyes at evangelicals.   Yet they effect Israel policy.

 

As for Western europe being idiots.  Not sure where you'd get that from... Europe is just playing to it's more invested demographic, due to the majority of the population not really giving a shit and more or less just sick of the situation and mildly impatient.

Yes, you've mentioned the Cold War thing a dozen times. The fact of the matter is that it has no relevance on the matter anymore. The Kremlin is not influencing these state's decisions anymore, and the fact that they're still against Israel could just be coincidental, or from cultural similarities. To say that these states cannot think for themselves in terms of foreign policy is, as I mentioned, insulting.

Now on the stance of Western Europe. Take, for example, a country that has say 2% of western immigrants. By your reasoning above, that would make 2% for Palestine, and 98% who don't give a shit. Would that be enough to constitue a stance of "well we must be for Palestine"? Keep in mind that these countries are still allies to America, despite disagreeing on this.

America itself is a different story altogether. To the outside viewer, there seems to be a lot of "dancing around" the issue. I am not entirely sure why that is. I have been told that it's to keep America's Jewish population happy, and that they have enough numbers to swing an election, but I'm skeptical about that. All that I know is that if ANYONE journalistic in America that raises a slight doubt about Israel's actions, they seem to go through the tar & feather line and never heard from in public again. Quite an interesting stance for a country that champions free speech in order to collect all facets of an argument.

It seems impossible to criticise Israel and NOT be an anti-semite.


Or it's just a matter of paying attention to UN votes and knowing about about the Nonaligned Movement (NAM).  Which is specifically a voting block created to counterbalance the US and vote against basically everything they are for.

 

Though yeah.  Why wouldn't 2% be enough? (a 2% over other highly interested parties anyway). You can't begin to deal with the US until you get elected.

It's not like Europe is calling for vast UN sanctions on Israel or anything, or even denouncing statements in most cases.   Just mild displeasure here or there.  With the biggest noise "coincdentally" coming from the nations with the biggest muslim populations/voting blocks.


Hell, comments now are argueably more pro israel then they were 3 weeks ago. 



Kasz216 on 16 November 2012

I got no problem with the holocaust photos bubbles, but avoid the naked ones due to forum rules.