|
CommieGIR posted:How did you think he got his custom tag? If the IDF were flying MiGs and dropping Chinese-made munitions on kids in Gaza, I would still find that horrifying. Maybe you wouldn't care the moment you no longer saw it as a reflection on you since there was no American backing for it, but that says a great deal about your motivations and nothing about the legitimacy or morality of military action in highly populated civilian areas 
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 03:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 11:10 |
|
|
The Insect Court posted:If the IDF were flying MiGs and dropping Chinese-made munitions on kids in Gaza, I would still find that horrifying. Nope, I'd still be horrified. But my country would still not be directly sponsoring it anymore, it would be less of my tax dollars going to it Nice Strawman
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Nope, I'd still be horrified. But my country would still not be directly sponsoring it anymore, it would be less of my tax dollars going to it More importantly, it would make it less relevant for you to agitate in this area with your own government. It's like when someone was telling me I should do something about a right-winged party being mean to its women politicians. "What influence would I have over them, when I am not in their constituency to being with" was my response. That being said, it's common on this board to poo poo on Russia for supporting Assad, so I'm not sure what the implied double standard here is supposed to be at all. Honestly, TIC seems to drat us all if we do or if we don't, as long as we have an issue with Israeli policy, it doesn't matter why, there's something insidious behind it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 03:38
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:America makes money off its arms exports, why should I be against Israel's purchase of another F-35 squadron with optionals for future solid state laser upgrade after naval proving demonstrates efficacy? I'm making money off selling drugs to kids, why should I be against them buy heroin off me with optional meth?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 05:39
|
|
|
Booourns posted:I'm making money off selling drugs to kids, why should I be against them buy heroin off me with optional meth? As long as they have a prescription for the medication, I see nothing wrong here?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:07
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:As long as they have a prescription for the medication, I see nothing wrong here? Can you honestly deny that you're trolling at this point?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:09
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Can you honestly deny that you're trolling at this point? Tanquam ex ungue trollem.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:13
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Can you honestly deny that you're trolling at this point? Can the rest of you deny you're enabling?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:14
|
|
|
I wish the mods would acknowlege his existence.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:16
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Can the rest of you deny you're enabling? I want an honest counterpoint to the I/P argument. Devil's advocate or whatever to keep the conversation going. Obviously MIGF is not it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:Can you honestly deny that you're trolling at this point? I'm really not, though. You want an actionable policy that'd make progress towards peace? Israel could use fixed election dates. More certainty in elections means more moderate political stances being taken and less need to cater to base while solidifying party support. Counterpoint on I/P? Neither side has hope of the other making sacrifices for the cause of peace, so neither side will make sacrifices of domestic popularity for the cause of peace. In that scenario, support for Israel is the establishment--the quite safe, profitable, and low risk--option to support in future policy implementation. My Imaginary GF fucked around with this message at 06:27 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:24
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:I'm really not, though. You want an actionable policy that'd make progress towards peace? Israel could use fixed election dates. More certainty in elections means more moderate political stances being taken and less need to cater to base while solidifying party support. There are fixed election dates; however, since Israel is a parliamentary democracy, there is no point in keeping the Knesset going without early elections if there is no coalition majority. But, I mean, sure, they could go the American route and have a completely dysfunctional Executive <-> Legislative boondoggle. Much better.  quote:Counterpoint on I/P? Neither side has hope of the other making sacrifices for the cause of peace, so neither side will make sacrifices of domestic popularity for the cause of peace. In that scenario, support for Israel is the establishment--the quite safe, profitable, and low risk--option to support in future policy implementation. Actually, the only reason current Israeli policy seems tenable to its leaders is due to the US masking it from the international consequences of these policies. Just sit out a UNSC vote and see how you drag them kicking and screaming towards peace. Do it now before they're overrun with completely incorrigible theocrats.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:29
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Actually, the only reason current Israeli policy seems tenable to its leaders is due to the US masking it from the international consequences of these policies. Just sit out a UNSC vote and see how you drag them kicking and screaming towards peace. Do it now before they're overrun with completely incorrigible theocrats. You seem to severely underappreciate the American willingness to work with, and strongly support, politically-expedient, incorrigible theocrats.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:31
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:You seem to severely underappreciate the American willingness to work with, and strongly support, politically-expedient, incorrigible theocrats. With Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc, there's serious natural resources basically pumping themselves out. Israel's only claim to fame is a bunch of dodgy claims on fields in the West Bank and Golan Heights, and in disputed waters, that are going to be a bitch to extract and a bitch and a half to secure. The most important thing, though, is that rising instability through Israeli incorrigibility is ultimately going to make the whole Israel-Jordan-Egypt stability triangle unsustainable, and when Israel is run by incorrigible theocrats, it will be too late for the US to push them to play nice. Now, when there's a cowed Palestinian leadership and an unstable Israeli one is when you need to strike with strong diplomacy and dangling heavy consequences. You need to make those Israeli Jews choose people who will negotiate, and you then need to force the people they choose to do that. Now. You're going to pay dearly tomorrow for what you have to pay quite a bit for today.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:35
|
|
|
emanresu tnuocca posted:It's genuinely absurd that this completely avoidable 70 year-old conflict would be perceived as a centuries long blood feud which can only ever be resolved through the extermination of one (or both) people, and it's all the working of cynical and greedy Israeli politicians. You just talked above about how violence fuels the appeal of the Israeli right. I don't think Bibi in 1996 or Sharon in 2001 get elected without Hamas and Fatah respectively starting bombing campaigns. Clearly Labor's commitment to peace is overstated by the M.J. Rosenberg types, and you can argue that Israel would not have demolished most of the settlements or Fatah would not have caved on refugees, but you have Fatah members who basically say they had a deal with Barak at Taba that Sharon's election derailed. Absurd Alhazred posted:
Want to bet that Russia and China are cynical enough to switch sides given the proper incentives? Kim Jong Il fucked around with this message at 07:02 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 06:58
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:You just talked above about how violence fuels the appeal of the Israeli right. I don't think Bibi in 1996 or Sharon in 2001 get elected without Hamas and Fatah respectively starting bombing campaigns. Clearly Labor's commitment to peace is overstated by the M.J. Rosenberg types, and you can argue that Israel would not have demolished most of the settlements or Fatah would not have caved on refugees, but you have Fatah members who basically say they had a deal with Barak at Taba that Sharon's election derailed. quote:Want to bet that Russia and China are cynical enough to switch sides given the proper incentives? Israel still has way too many of the trappings of a liberal democracy to make a good Russia/China client. You need a state that will absolutely 110% speak in favor of Our Great Benefactors, and trample down anyone who whispers anything else. That's not happening in Israel, with all its faults.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
syscall girl posted:I laughed when I read that England was actually trading us old Harriers for F-35s. But also paying for the F-35s. Which definitely won't kill more marines than the Harriers did. At all. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZLUERkcFoY Oh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 08:14
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Now why would Marines be killed by their F-35s? Apparently even Israel has cancelled orders for V-22s at this point. The body count on that plane may be too much for them to handle. http://www.ibtimes.com/israel-commits-31-lockheed-f-35-aircraft-cancels-6-boeing-built-v-22-ospreys-amid-1717192
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 08:27
|
|
|
Considering how the US couldn't even get the ISDF to buy the Bradley Fighting Vehicle, I find it surprising that they managed it with the F-35.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 08:31
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:You just talked above about how violence fuels the appeal of the Israeli right. I don't think Bibi in 1996 or Sharon in 2001 get elected without Hamas and Fatah respectively starting bombing campaigns. Clearly Labor's commitment to peace is overstated by the M.J. Rosenberg types, and you can argue that Israel would not have demolished most of the settlements or Fatah would not have caved on refugees, but you have Fatah members who basically say they had a deal with Barak at Taba that Sharon's election derailed. In the case of 2001 and the second intifada the case could be argued that half a decade of procrastination coupled with Sharon's own incitement contributed to flaring up things in the first place, there's also the common perception that Barak lost the elections on account of people disapproving of the way he handled the Lebanon disengagement (People called him Ehud Barach - Ehud 'who fled'), there is obviously a correlation between increased tensions and violence to right-leaning elections but this does not mean that this could not have been avoided through their own choice of policies, which is basically what I'm getting at. As for the 'imminent agreements', basically see what Absurd said and furthermore look at the actual maps of the partition plans offered in those rounds of negotiations, or alternatively at Livni's comments (and intentional backhanded election dealings) in the 2007 (8?) negotiations. The Palestinians were offered (perhaps not even in good faith) a cantonized territory separated by a multitude of Israeli-only roads and access corridors, ultimately being offered an autonomy under Israeli rule (Livni's famous "Houston we have a problem"), rather than true sovereignty. In both occasions you have statements by Israeli officials suggesting that the negotiations were not truly in good faith (Ben-Ami's "we were an impeached government, we had no mandate" and Livni's "Olmert is on the way out, after the next elections you'll be able to deal directly with me"). So, yeah, I view that onus as being on the Israeli side. Anyway, do you guys remember that Israeli PR machine taking pride in running a field hospital outside the Erez crossing that allegedly treated Palestinians injured during protective edge. Well: http://mekomit.co.il/%D7%91%D7%99%D...C%D7%9A-%D7%A6/ quote:Only the residents of Gaza did not see reality eye to eye with the Israeli ambassador [to the UN] or the IDF PR representatives. They, who were assaulted by IDF troopers, who were injured and killed by the IDF, who lost their homes and livelihood at the hands of the IDF, have viewed the construction of the hospital as a cynical exploitation of their misfortune. Cool. Cool.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 09:17
|
|
|
Kim Jong Il posted:Want to bet that Russia and China are cynical enough to switch sides given the proper incentives? My understanding has always been: A: The Chinese don't give a poo poo about Middle Eastern politics. B: They see more economic benefit in siding with hundreds-of-millions of Arabs over a few million Israelis. Also it gives moral/popular cred. Don't know about the Russians.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 10:28
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Nope, I'd still be horrified. But my country would still not be directly sponsoring it anymore, it would be less of my tax dollars going to it I'll have to take your word for it. It's just that the go-to answer when anti-Zionists are asked about why such the monomaniacal focus on Israeli misdeeds compared to the far greater atrocities committed by Syria or ISIS is that "My tax dollars are going to buy bombs to kill Palestinians", which seems to clearly suggest that it's the "my tax dollars" bit that's dispositive, not the "to kill Palestinians". And that seems pretty narcissistic and immoral, doesn't it? Not to mention strangely conservative, although in your defense it's less of a conservative strawman than a conservative fallacy. To suggest that where the assembly line the bomb rolled off is anything like as important as who the bomb is being dropped on and why. Eregos posted:My understanding has always been: Yeah neither Russia nor China has any issues with Islamic fundamentalism, just like Russia wouldn't be willing to pave over Gaza for the chance to place a warm-water port there and China wouldn't see any strategic advantage in a close relationship with Israel's military-industrial complex. The Insect Court fucked around with this message at 10:55 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 10:44
|
|
|
israel holds a special place in our hearts because our government sponsors it at the expense of the security of american citizens and its reputation abroad, and yet still the government of israel are smug unappreciative petulant cocksuckers who cry anti-semitism at the slightest hint of criticism from our emir, B. Hussein Obama or any others. they are basically one of the worst allies in american history and really demonstrate the folly of not heeding george washington's outgoing advice.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 10:50
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Okay, I'll admit right now that I could easily not know poo poo about nothing, but in my month-long desk-jockey version of IDF basic training, I was taught that our arms use protocol when defending an outpost was: You are correct, however you will never win this argument on this forum because there's too many Americans and they are convinced as hell that if you point a gun at something you must be prepared to completely destroy whatever that is with all the bullets you got (still reasonable in a "don't point your gun at poo poo unless you mean it" type of way) but then from that somehow follows that if you pull the trigger you gotta aim center mass and keep pulling until it goes click, which is dumb as gently caress. Real life counterexamples, such as Dutch police being trained to fire at legs to disable and them doing this all the time is not a persuasive argument and may instead be taken as the Dutch police, rather than the American police, being highly unprofessional.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 10:57
|
|
|
Jagchosis posted:israel holds a special place in our hearts because our government sponsors it at the expense of the security of american citizens and its reputation abroad, and yet still the government of israel are smug unappreciative petulant cocksuckers who cry anti-semitism at the slightest hint of criticism from our emir, B. Hussein Obama or any others. they are basically one of the worst allies in american history and really demonstrate the folly of not heeding george washington's outgoing advice. Ok, you hate Israel because they fail to show proper deference to American leaders and because they're another reason to put a Canadian flag patch on your backpack. Glad we've cleared up your motivations. My problem with Israel is the occupation. Different strokes for different folks, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 10:58
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:Ok, you hate Israel because they fail to show proper deference to American leaders and because they're another reason to put a Canadian flag patch on your backpack. Glad we've cleared up your motivations. well you wanted to know what was extraordinary about israel's human rights abuses, compared to all the other evil that goes on in the world edit: american interests are basically always selfish regardless of the proponents place on a political spectrum; weird but true Homura and Sickle fucked around with this message at 11:55 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 11:07
|
|
|
Regarding when IDF soldiers are allowed to open fire: When spotting a 'suspicious' person: 'Stop!' 'Stop and identify yourself' 'Stop or I'll shoot' 'Load/reload your weapon in order to scare/draw attention' 'Fire 2 shots at a 60 degree angle away from the person' 'Shoot for the legs' 'Shoot for centre mass' This is all assuming he keeps coming towards you, obviously. This all also flies out the window when you see that he is a direct thread to you or others (throwing rocks does not count as a direct threat, also molotov cocktails don't count as a direct threat if they're already been thrown according to the IDF), or if you're are in an active war zone (or operation zone, I guess? I don't know what Israel keeps calling them now.) If you're in an active warzone you're allowed to open fire on anything that you can identify as an enemy combatant. Including, but not limited to vehicles and people. Not too sure about actual buildings. Source: My training as an IDF soldier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 11:24
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:I'll have to take your word for it. It's just that the go-to answer when anti-Zionists are asked about why such the monomaniacal focus on Israeli misdeeds compared to the far greater atrocities committed by Syria or ISIS is that "My tax dollars are going to buy bombs to kill Palestinians", which seems to clearly suggest that it's the "my tax dollars" bit that's dispositive, not the "to kill Palestinians". And that seems pretty narcissistic and immoral, doesn't it? Not to mention strangely conservative, although in your defense it's less of a conservative strawman than a conservative fallacy. To suggest that where the assembly line the bomb rolled off is anything like as important as who the bomb is being dropped on and why. Americans have a pretty huge stake in Israel so it makes sense to me. As to another reason for the monomaniacal focus on Israeli misdeeds its also often people's first blatant example of hypocrisy in the media. Its not shocking when one of the countries we are told are maniacs does bad things, everyone still condemns them. It is shocking when you realise (at least in the UK) many of the base level assumptions about Israel are opposite in reality. E.g. Me and practically anyone I talk to in the UK who isn't already independently knowledgeable at first thinks Israel is a self-supported, developing country of equal size with Palestine and weaker militarily than its larger neighbours. I honestly think Israel would be able to do what it does much easier if it toned down the propaganda, all countries use propaganda internally and internationally but the successful ones are sly about it. If they just were somewhat quiet, referred to ongoing "police action" and owned up to the "regrettable" loss of life and that was more or less it for them, nobody would really care apart from Campus groups and they could use whatever internal propaganda they liked. As it is the very basic initial questions anybody asks go as follows: "Well, if Gaza is so bad why don't they leave?" They aren't allowed to. "Well if Israel is under attack from another country they have a right to self defence" They aren't, Gaza and the West Bank are under occupation and controlled jointly by the UN and Israel. "Well why does Hamas keep starting trouble?" Actually Israel broke x ceasefire. "Well Israel is a democracy." Hamas were elected in UN supervised elections. I dunno, easily provable hypocrisy always gets a reaction. Take it from the UK, just don't talk about any of this poo poo and it goes away, we should know. It was only when we started talking about how we'd made India into a democratic bastion of freedom that public opinion turned the second someone pointed at the millions of starving and shot people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 11:54
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:
I agree with you, but Gazans electing Hamas (a known terrorist organization) isn't exactly a point in their favour. I realise that they a lot of them probably feel that it is their only choice, and it might point to how horrible Israel is being towards them, but it definitely isn't a pro in their campaign. It's more of a con in Israel's policy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 12:22
|
|
|
Neither is Israel electing their current politicians.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:My problem with Israel is the occupation. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. Yeah, I don't buy this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
An Angry Bug posted:Neither is Israel electing their current politicians. Yeah we're pretty lovely. At this point I'd settle for nearly anyone but Bibi.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 16:31
|
|
|
Doflamingo posted:Yeah we're pretty lovely. At this point I'd settle for nearly anyone but Bibi. Guess what we're definitely gonna get though?  Seriously the only way that absolute fucker doesn't get re-elected is if somehow magically the Likudniks depose him and have someone else run for PM, and that just ain't gonna happen.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 16:34
|
|
|
Seeing as the only person who could even begin to challenge Bibi's control over the coalition is Bennett, I'm pretty happy with Netanyahu.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 16:45
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:Seeing as the only person who could even begin to challenge Bibi's control over the coalition is Bennett, I'm pretty happy with Netanyahu. Why? Bibi's all about keeping the status quo. With Bennett things might get worse enough that the US and/or UN intervene!  Basically I'm saying that Israel is a loving baby having a temper tantrum and we desperately need a responsible adult to step in and discipline us, hard, because we can't seem to do it ourselves anymore. Doflamingo fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
Doflamingo posted:Why? Bibi's all about keeping the status quo. With Bennett things might get worse enough that the US and/or UN intervene! I'm not an accelerationist. Prime Minister Naftali Bennett gives me cold chills.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:I'm not an accelerationist. Prime Minister Naftali Bennett gives me cold chills. Same, I'm just really desperate over here truth be told. I have a feeling it's gonna get a lot worse before it gets any better at any rate. Doflamingo fucked around with this message at 17:26 on Dec 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
The Insect Court posted:My problem with Israel is the occupation. Different strokes for different folks, I guess. This is the first time I recall you even saying you have a problem with Israel, instead of calling all its detractors antisemites. I guess that's some measure of progress. So what do you think should be done about that, by forums posters who are mostly in the US?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:14
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:This is the first time I recall you even saying you have a problem with Israel, instead of calling all its detractors antisemites. I guess that's some measure of progress. Don't get too excited. His problem could be that the occupation is far too lax.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 11:10 |
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Now why would Marines be killed by their F-35s? maybe  but that's a clip from a videogame yes?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2014 17:32
|
|