So did Isreal do the right thing?

[ForeverAutumn]

As things in the Middle East have progressed over the last week, I can't help but think back to our conversation a short while ago when two US soldiers were killed and beheaded, about whether the US should have retaliated and, if so, how?

So, did Isreal do the right thing when two of their soldiers were captured? Is this how the US should have responded when it happened to them? What are your thoughts on the current situation in the Middle East?

[Kam]

As things in the Middle East have progressed over the last week, I can't help but think back to our conversation a short while ago when two US soldiers were killed and beheaded, about whether the US should have retaliated and, if so, how?

So, did Isreal do the right thing when two of their soldiers were captured? Is this how the US should have responded when it happened to them? What are your thoughts on the current situation in the Middle East?

wow is that a powderkeg of a question! :)

[shokhead]

As things in the Middle East have progressed over the last week, I can't help but think back to our conversation a short while ago when two US soldiers were killed and beheaded, about whether the US should have retaliated and, if so, how?

So, did Isreal do the right thing when two of their soldiers were captured? Is this how the US should have responded when it happened to them? What are your thoughts on the current situation in the Middle East?

It happened in there backyard. Heck yes they should have and i hope they keep it up. Maybe they can take care of some of the crap so that we wont have to.

[Resident Loser]

It happened in there backyard. Heck yes they should have and i hope they keep it up. Maybe they can take care of some of the crap so that we wont have to.

...and here comes the fly...bzzzzz!!...

That cr@p is because of them...

jimHJJ(...talk about Catch-22...)

[trollgirl]

Maybe they can take care of some of the crap so that we wont have to.

No, I must agree with R Loser. "We/US" are already cleaning up their crap in Iraq, except for the oil factor. There were two triggers: Saddam decided to trade oil in euros, threating Shrub and his oil buddies, and Saddam decided to form a "Jerusalem Army" to take back the Holy City, threatening the Jews. He had to go down - see what happens to a "decider"?! Anyway, the Zionists have bit off more than they can chew this time, and will be agitating, and their "Christian" running-dogs will be agitating for US intervention. WW III, here we come - the run-down to Armageddon. I fear that most US personnel in Iraq will not be coming home...and worse, that large areas all over the world will become self-illuminated glass parking lots. Make your final music and gear purchases, and enjoy while you can...

Laz

[kexodusc]

No, I must agree with R Loser. "We/US" are already cleaning up their crap in Iraq, except for the oil factor. There were two triggers: Saddam decided to trade oil in euros, threating Shrub and his oil buddies, and Saddam decided to form a "Jerusalem Army" to take back the Holy City, threatening the Jews. He had to go down - see what happens to a "decider"?! Anyway, the Zionists have bit off more than they can chew this time, and will be agitating, and their "Christian" running-dogs will be agitating for US intervention. WW III, here we come - the run-down to Armageddon. I fear that most US personnel in Iraq will not be coming home...and worse, that large areas all over the world will become self-illuminated glass parking lots. Make your final music and gear purchases, and enjoy while you can...

Laz

Trollgirl, you seem nice enough, but seriously, the only contributions you make at AUDIOREVIEW.com are off-topic political conspiracy, anti-U.S. rhetoric. You're either hard up looking for a spot to rant in cyberspace, or you use this handle to disassociate yourself from your comments. Which is it?

Methinks the UK had a zillion times more to do with these problems than the Jews, the Palestinians, or the US...time for them to step up and be accountable for some of their bad decisions.

And FWIW, I'm pretty sure RL will confirm you don't agree with what he had to say...

[trollgirl]

Trollgirl, you seem nice enough, but seriously, the only contributions you make at AUDIOREVIEW.com are off-topic political conspiracy, anti-U.S. rhetoric. You're either hard up looking for a spot to rant in cyberspace, or you use this handle to disassociate yourself from your comments. Which is it?

Methinks the UK had a zillion times more to do with these problems than the Jews, the Palestinians, or the US...time for them to step up and be accountable for some of their bad decisions.

And FWIW, I'm pretty sure RL will confirm you don't agree with what he had to say...

Kex, you should listen to yourself sometimes. I am taken aback at the quickness with which you jump all over me. First, I make contributions other than "rants". You can find me especially over at the Analog forum from time-to-time, and I got back to this thread after a discreet PM to another member on serious financial matters. I hope it helps him. Second, "...political conspiracy, anti-US rhetoric..." may be how you see it, but for me, it is a matter of reading a lot from a variety of sources and viewpoints, and connecting the dots. Unlike most of my countrymen, I don't see why any other country should kowtow to the American view of things. I love my country, but at the same time, I realise that we are going to have to pay for our crimes and mistakes. Others think we can do no wrong or make a mistake. As for the handle, thing, it came about because at some point I could no longer log on as "Lazarus Short" anymore, and had to fall back on my daughter's moniker. Don't read a CONSPIRACY into it, dude! I take full credit for my comments, that's why I sign off as Laz. Further, if you must know, I wrote the post in question feeling very sad, and we will presently see if I am correct.

BTW, you are spot on about the UK. The whole present sad situation in the Middle East can be easily laid at their door.

Laz [a nice guy, after all]

[kexodusc]

Kex, you should listen to yourself sometimes. I am taken aback at the quickness with which you jump all over me. First, I make contributions other than "rants". You can find me especially over at the Analog forum from time-to-time, and I got back to this thread after a discreet PM to another member on serious financial matters. I hope it helps him. Second, "...political conspiracy, anti-US rhetoric..." may be how you see it, but for me, it is a matter of reading a lot from a variety of sources and viewpoints, and connecting the dots. Unlike most of my countrymen, I don't see why any other country should kowtow to the American view of things. I love my country, but at the same time, I realise that we are going to have to pay for our crimes and mistakes. Others think we can do no wrong or make a mistake. As for the handle, thing, it came about because at some point I could no longer log on as "Lazarus Short" anymore, and had to fall back on my daughter's moniker. Don't read a CONSPIRACY into it, dude! I take full credit for my comments, that's why I sign off as Laz. Further, if you must know, I wrote the post in question feeling very sad, and we will presently see if I am correct.

BTW, you are spot on about the UK. The whole present sad situation in the Middle East can be easily laid at their door.

Laz [a nice guy, after all]

You're right, I did come across to harsh. My apologies...you ahve every right to post here that I do....Still...I'm struggling to see how the Jews were responsible for the war in Iraq...:cornut:

[trollgirl]

You're right, I did come across to harsh. My apologies...you ahve every right to post here that I do....Still...I'm struggling to see how the Jews were responsible for the war in Iraq...:cornut:

Apology accepted! As for the war in Iraq, the causes are often complex, and it is always helpful to look deeply at the situation, and see who benefits from events.

Laz

[ForeverAutumn]

You're right, I did come across to harsh. My apologies...you ahve every right to post here that I do....Still...I'm struggling to see how the Jews were responsible for the war in Iraq...:cornut:

Could we refer to "the Jews" as "the Isreali's"? That's like referring to Al Quada as "the Muslims". I'm not comparing the Isreali's to Al Quada, I'm just saying that there are Jews all over the world who have nothing to do with the Middle East conflict. Thanks.

[shokhead]

I can already see the hard feeling in this thread so for me,i'm bailing.

[kexodusc]

Could we refer to "the Jews" as "the Isreali's"? That's like referring to Al Quada as "the Muslims". I'm not comparing the Isreali's to Al Quada, I'm just saying that there are Jews all over the world who have nothing to do with the Middle East conflict. Thanks.

Sure, FA, I appreciate the PC sensitivity - fair point.

Though I would respectfully suggest it's more like calling Netherlanders the Dutch than
referring to Al Quada as "the Muslims".
I've picked that up from spending so much time with two people of Jewish faith I work with, over the last 2 years I've just adopted their lingo for Israelis...Not the first time I've been taken to task on it either ...
Anyway, to them there is no distinction, they use the two words interchangeably, when I asked why, the answer they gave me included a lot of history, Israel's Law of Return, and more I'm sure I can't recall. As it's been simplified to me all Jews are welcomed Israeli's (or can be if they visit Israel) but not vice-versa, so it's common to use the term "Jew" as a nationalistic descriptor rather than only a reference to religious belief. Bad habbit I've adopted, I guess. Oddly enough it seems to bother Christians more than anyone else. No offence intended. Sincere apologies..

[ForeverAutumn]

Sure, FA, I appreciate the PC sensitivity - fair point.

Though I would respectfully suggest it's more like calling Netherlanders the Dutch than
referring to Al Quada as "the Muslims".
I've picked that up from spending so much time with two people of Jewish faith I work with, over the last 2 years I've just adopted their lingo for Israelis...Not the first time I've been taken to task on it either ...
Anyway, to them there is no distinction, they use the two words interchangeably, when I asked why, the answer they gave me included a lot of history, Israel's Law of Return, and more I'm sure I can't recall. As it's been simplified to me all Jews are welcomed Israeli's (or can be if they visit Israel) but not vice-versa, so it's common to use the term "Jew" as a nationalistic descriptor rather than only a reference to religious belief. Bad habbit I've adopted, I guess. Oddly enough it seems to bother Christians more than anyone else. No offence intended. Sincere apologies..

I see where you're coming from now and there is no apology necessary. I think that I know you well enough by now (as much as you can "know" someone from an internet board) to know that you didn't mean to offend. And, actually, I wasn't offended at all. As you say, it's more a PC thing...I like to avoid the broader stereotypes whenever I can. I have a lot of Jewish friends who would not consider themselves within the context of this discussion and who think that Isreali politics are quite radical. On the other hand I've also met Jews who think along the same lines as your co-workers...Jews are Isreali's by birthright (or something along those lines).

But we digress...

[ForeverAutumn]

I can already see the hard feeling in this thread so for me,i'm bailing.

No hard feelings. Just honest discussion.

[Resident Loser]

...the history lesson more times than I care to...France, UK, most of Europe laid the foundations for the current state of affairs, as did the Zionists and the UN...and we, the US, are not without some blame, tacit participation is still participation, regardless of how well intentioned.

Re: Jews/Israeli's...most of the interviews I've seen with non-Israeli Jews show "full" support for the current actions...my question: If you support the activities WTF are you doing here? Why aren't you over there supporting them? And that pretty much goes for all nationalities who support their homeland/motherland/fatherland with that mi encanto-type of covert nationalism...

jimHJJ(..."...no allegiance to any foreign prince or potentate..."...)

[kexodusc]

I see where you're coming from now and there is no apology necessary. I think that I know you well enough by now (as much as you can "know" someone from an internet board) to know that you didn't mean to offend. And, actually, I wasn't offended at all. As you say, it's more a PC thing...I like to avoid the broader stereotypes whenever I can. I have a lot of Jewish friends who would not consider themselves within the context of this discussion and who think that Isreali politics are quite radical. On the other hand I've also met Jews who think along the same lines as your co-workers...Jews are Isreali's by birthright (or something along those lines).

But we digress...

Actually, in response to yours and RL's comments about Israeli support - the few I've spoken with don't support the "measured response" (as a certain Canadian politician called it), but also admit to being so far detached from the last few decades of high-tensions that they aren't the ones to ask.

I have to admit, if I was Israel, having gone through what its people have gone through, I'd probably react every bit as strongly, if not moreso out of fear of history repeating itself. There's a point where a people have been attacked and persecuted so many times that any act of aggression against them triggers an explosive response, maybe they're overly paranoid now. (and I'm not suggesting Israel didn't cast the first stone or start its fair share - who alive seriously knows?). It's unfortunate, because I'm sure the other side feels largely the same way - hence "escalation", as the media refers to it.

I don't think it helps that Hezbollah's political platform calls for "the destruction of Israel" and that Iran's leader stated its policy was to "wipe Israel off the map". If your neighbours said that to you, you'd probably be a bit trigger happy too.

I think Dream Theater wrote a song about all this....

[noddin0ff]

I think given their circumstances, they're doing the right thing. They've got a fanatic militant group that wants to wipe them off the map that is backed by a regime that is about to develop nuclear weapons. I think the current response was/is way over done relative to having a few soldiers kidnapped. But in the context of the likelyhood that in the not so distant future those 30 mile missles might be delivering nuclear material (dirty or not) at the hands of suicidal fanatics...I think they're doing the right thing to secure their future safety.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I think given their circumstances, they're doing the right thing. They've got a fanatic militant group that wants to wipe them off the map that is backed by a regime that is about to develop nuclear weapons. I think the current response was/is way over done relative to having a few soldiers kidnapped. But in the context of the likelyhood that in the not so distant future those 30 mile missles might be delivering nuclear material (dirty or not) at the hands of suicidal fanatics...I think they're doing the right thing to secure their future safety.

I agree with this, and RL comment on Europe. As much as I love Europe (specifically Great Britain because its my second home country and where my grandmother is from) they have made a huge mess in the middle east trying to push western style governments on tribal religious people. A square peg in a round hole. After they made this mess, they have now become to passive to clean it up.

I think Israel is doing the right thing. For Lebanon to cry out save us smacks of hypocrasy. On one hand you have provided a home for what every other country calls terrorists, and then when the terrorist get out of hand and are punished you attempt to seperate the Lebanese people from the terrorist. If the Lebanese people lend them this kind of support, then they have to take the punishment with the terrorist. I feel the same for the Palistinians. If you elect a terror group as your government, don't expect money from us, Europe, or anyone else. And don't cry out when the terrorist have to be put back in the box and you have to suffer in the process.

Flame suit on!

[Fergymunster]

As things in the Middle East have progressed over the last week, I can't help but think back to our conversation a short while ago when two US soldiers were killed and beheaded, about whether the US should have retaliated and, if so, how?

So, did Isreal do the right thing when two of their soldiers were captured? Is this how the US should have responded when it happened to them? What are your thoughts on the current situation in the Middle East?
I think the leaders should sit down and discuss these problems over coffee.That's all,no need to respond as I'm happy listening to my headphones.

[Florian]

I say shoot them all and let God sort it out :cornut: (And i mean all religious fanatics)

[ericl]

I think Israel is doing the right thing. For Lebanon to cry out save us smacks of hypocrasy. On one hand you have provided a home for what every other country calls terrorists, and then when the terrorist get out of hand and are punished you attempt to seperate the Lebanese people from the terrorist. If the Lebanese people lend them this kind of support, then they have to take the punishment with the terrorist. I feel the same for the Palistinians. If you elect a terror group as your government, don't expect money from us, Europe, or anyone else. And don't cry out when the terrorist have to be put back in the box and you have to suffer in the process.

Flame suit on!

I'm not going to flame you, but from what I have gathered, the Lebanese government is a fledgling, tinpot operation that has no control over Hezbollah. Until very recently Syria was running Lebanon. Syria left, but Hezboollah (supported by Syria and Iran) has remained. They are more militarily powerful in Lebanon than the Lebanese "military".

Of course most of the citizens of Lebanon have nothing to do with Hezbollah. The Lebanese people and government are both essentially helpless. Israel should be able to deal with Hezbollah, but what Israel seems to be doing is punishing all the innocent civilians (destroying their infrastructure and what not) in hopes that it will cause them to "revolt" against Hezbollah or something. They're doing the same thing with Hamas. You can bet that the opposite will happen (actually it already has - Israel's aggression has made both Hamas and Hezbollah the powerful organizations they are today). This is going to rally more people to Hezbollah's cause. It's like attacking Utah because there are some polygamists hiding out there.

I don't like where this is going at all. Next stops, Syria and Iran. At this point, it is safe to say that all of our world leaders are complete failures.

OK, I am going to go back to my policy of staying out of political threads now..

[kexodusc]

Back to the original question - Perhaps one other consideration, the situation was a bit different when American's were captured. The terrorist groups captured US citizens who were basically on their soil. What we're being told is the Israeli soldiers were captured during an attack <i>on</i> Israeli soil.
I don't know about you but somehow, in my twisted logic, the latter seems a more aggressive, war-like act than the former.
Attacking me in your back yard is one thing, attacking me in my front yard is something else. Perhaps in light of that, the response has been "measured"?

Isreal certainly has the capability to do far worse damage to Lebanon than it is doing.

Side note - the name of the mission to kidnap the soliders "Operation Truthful Promise",
The Israeli counterattacks "Operation Just Reward".

Nothing, if not dramatic.

[kexodusc]

I'm not going to flame you, but from what I have gathered, the Lebanese government is a fledgling, tinpot operation that has no control over Hezbollah. Until very recently Syria was running Lebanon. Syria left, but Hezboollah (supported by Syria and Iran) has remained. They are more militarily powerful in Lebanon than the Lebanese "military".

Lebanon's military isn't huge, but it isn't exactly doing much to try either. And her people did elect the political wing of Hezbollah. There's at least some support there...


Israel should be able to deal with Hezbollah, but what Israel seems to be doing is punishing all the innocent civilians (destroying their infrastructure and what not) in hopes that it will cause them to "revolt" against Hezbollah or something.

Not exactly. In the good ol' days the French and English war tactics were much more civilized..line up in rows, and take turns shooting each other, or settle it "on the battlefield" .... Well now we have Hezbollah terrorists not playing by the rules, hiding in hospitals, stores, schools, public infrastructure and among the general public. If Israel's right to defend herself means collateral damage to another country, the original perpetrators should share the responsibility, if not bear it completely.


I don't like where this is going at all. Next stops, Syria and Iran. At this point, it is safe to say that all of our world leaders are complete failures.
Could get ugly...Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced that an Israeli strike on Syria would be considered "attacking the whole Islamic world and this regime will receive a very fierce response" So if Iran bombs Israel (which is quite capable of dealing Iran a blow) does NATO or the UN respond? Bad business for Russia to go against Iran, China is a bit of a wildcard on this one...France seems to be sympathetic to its former imperialist buddies in Lebanon.

Getting pretty soupy..

[trollgirl]

I can already see the hard feeling in this thread so for me,i'm bailing.

Wise man here, perhaps...for bailing. But I wonder, whatever happened to speaking the truth, and letting the chips fall where they may? It is this, there is no consensus anymore, and one man's Truth is another man's vicious lie. Worse, good is called evil, and evil good.

Further, I'm thinking about the posts above, and expanding my frame of reference. My best friend is a big fan of Gorby, and he told me that Gorbachev said that the end of the Cold War was a gift, yes read that again: A GIFT, to the West. However, he also said, the West threw away its opportunity for lasting peace thru greed and arrogance. Former enemies in the Middle East had the same chance, as I recall, with the Camp David Accords, and I can not help but wonder if the chance for peace was thrown away for much the same reasons... Pre-emptive war, bombing everything in sight, refusing to admit wrong-doing, savaging our allies for even faint criticism...who does it sound like? We are so much alike, the USA and Israel [but I prefer the "J" word, knowing who Israel is and is not]. We have both been sowing to the wind for a long time, and I fear both will soon be reaping the whirlwind. Don't think for a second that I gloat when I write this, for it is sad.

Laz

[Geoffcin]

But in reality everyone one of us should be asking this question to himself or herself.

The sad fact is that real people are dieing. Not just the bad guys either. Innocent people. Women and children. People who have never raised a hand in anger against anyone have been terrorized and slaughtered. Homes destroyed, lives ruined. A whole country is now being bombed into to the same horrible state that Iraq is in.

Is it fair? Is it moral? Is it a sin before god?

[markw]

But in reality everyone one of us should be asking this question to himself or herself.

The sad fact is that real people are dieing. Not just the bad guys either. Innocent people. Women and children. People who have never raised a hand in anger against anyone have been terrorized and slaughtered. Homes destroyed, lives ruined. A whole country is now being bombed into to the same horrible state that Iraq is in.

Is it fair? Is it moral? Is it a sin before god?All that Lebanon has to do is return the two kidnapped soldiers and assure Israel that their will be no more rockets launched at them from their soil. ...and that no incursions into Israel will take place from there, either.

Simple as that.

If Lebanon was sincere about not wanting trouble with Israel they would have put a stop to the shenanigans in the south sometime within the last five years when Israel returned that land to Lebanon. Israel has been more than patient for five years as they lobbed rockets into Israel . Since they (Lebanon) seem to be either unwilling or unable to do the job, I guess it leaves Israel little choice except to do it themselves.

Remember, they are now using that land to stage incursions onto Israeli territory. That's a whole 'nuther ballgame and ratchets up the stakes quite a bit.

Until then, what is fair and moral? Who do you suppose is more accountable to God?

The terrorists, who accepted "land for peace" from Israel five years ago, only to use it to launch rockets at Israeli cities, send suicide bombers to blow up civilians and launch incursions into Israel, or the Israelis for finally reacting to that which has been their daily existance for fifty years or so? It seems they have run out of cheeks to turn.

It's been said that if the Arab nations gave up their weapons there would be peace. If Israel gives them up there will be a slaughter. Likewise, if Arab mothers loved their children more than they hated the Jews, there would be peace.

[ForeverAutumn]

But in reality everyone one of us should be asking this question to himself or herself.

The sad fact is that real people are dieing. Not just the bad guys either. Innocent people. Women and children. People who have never raised a hand in anger against anyone have been terrorized and slaughtered. Homes destroyed, lives ruined. A whole country is now being bombed into to the same horrible state that Iraq is in.

Is it fair? Is it moral? Is it a sin before god?

I thought this thread had been deleted at first. But I finally noticed it hiding up in The Cage. Why is there no "moved" notice like there is when threads are moved from one forum to another?

All very good questions Geoffcin. It is a sad fact of war that innocent people die. I'm thankful every day that these wars are not being waged in my own country...yet. Eight Canadian tourists were killed earlier this week in Lebanon. Hell, they don't even live there! They go on a vacation to a city that they believe is reasonably stable (under the perpetual circumstances), suddenly the winds change and they were bombed to death.

Is it fair? Never.
Is it moral? I would say, Yes, it is moral to defend yourself and protect your citizens. It's unfortunate and unfair that innocent people are caught in the process.
Is it a sin before god? As an athiest, I'll leave this one up to the religious to try to answer.

[Fergymunster]

I say shoot them all and let God sort it out :cornut: (And i mean all religious fanatics)
Hey Florian is that a picture of your music room.It looks nice.I bet you sleep good at night knowing that a missle is not on it's way.

[shokhead]

I thought this thread had been deleted at first. But I finally noticed it hiding up in The Cage. Why is there no "moved" notice like there is when threads are moved from one forum to another?

All very good questions Geoffcin. It is a sad fact of war that innocent people die. I'm thankful every day that these wars are not being waged in my own country...yet. Eight Canadian tourists were killed earlier this week in Lebanon. Hell, they don't even live there! They go on a vacation to a city that they believe is reasonably stable (under the perpetual circumstances), suddenly the winds change and they were bombed to death.

Is it fair? Never.
Is it moral? I would say, Yes, it is moral to defend yourself and protect your citizens. It's unfortunate and unfair that innocent people are caught in the process.
Is it a sin before god? As an athiest, I'll leave this one up to the religious to try to answer.

Sorry to hear of those deaths. I'm not sure how anyone could assume anywhere over there is reasonably safe.

[Geoffcin]

I thought this thread had been deleted at first. But I finally noticed it hiding up in The Cage. Why is there no "moved" notice like there is when threads are moved from one forum to another?

All very good questions Geoffcin. It is a sad fact of war that innocent people die. I'm thankful every day that these wars are not being waged in my own country...yet. Eight Canadian tourists were killed earlier this week in Lebanon. Hell, they don't even live there! They go on a vacation to a city that they believe is reasonably stable (under the perpetual circumstances), suddenly the winds change and they were bombed to death.

Is it fair? Never.
Is it moral? I would say, Yes, it is moral to defend yourself and protect your citizens. It's unfortunate and unfair that innocent people are caught in the process.
Is it a sin before god? As an athiest, I'll leave this one up to the religious to try to answer.

Of course it's moral to defend yourself, but when is it moral to bomb innocent people? If a suspect hides in a movie theater full of innocent people is it moral to bomb the movie theater?

I pose the religious question not for us, but for them, as fully 99.99% of the combatants are deeply religious. Supposedly they all pray to the same god. Surely he's not condoning the killing of innocents.

It's interesting to see that everyone has assumed I was talking strictly about Israels actions. Please re-read my post, I wasn't.

[ForeverAutumn]

Of course it's moral to defend yourself, but when is it moral to bomb innocent people? If a suspect hides in a movie theater full of innocent people is it moral to bomb the movie theater?


You know, that's a question that I struggle with. Its very difficult to see innocent people die. And I'm sure that it's not easy for the military to target a place where they know civilians will be. But, yes, in your example, I think that there are circumstances when bombing the movie theatre is moral. If the person that you are targeting is known to be a threat and there is no other known alternative to rid yourself of that threat, then I would say that bombing the theatre is moral.

If Osama Bin Laden were sitting in a movie theatre in Afganistan, it is moral to bomb the theatre even though some innocent people will be killed. By doing so, you are defending yourself by eliminating a very large threat and protecting your people. To not bomb the theatre leaves you open for Osama's next attack and puts your people at risk.

What is immoral is if you bombed the theatre just for the hell of it. Just because you can. With your sole purpose being only to hurt innocent people.

[shokhead]

When the bad guys are hiding and living around them,come out to kill and fight go back to the innocent people to hid,then yes they are going to get hurt and killed. Its a bad deal.

[ForeverAutumn]

When the bad guys are hiding and living around them,come out to kill and fight go back to the innocent people to hid,then yes they are going to get hurt and killed. Its a bad deal.

Good point. If the innocents are really innocent and want to save themselves, they need to turn in the bad guys who are hiding amonst them.

The problem is, the people in the theatre (to continue with the previous example) may not think that Osama is a bad guy. They may support his actions and may be protecting him. In which case, that makes them a threat also. Suddenly the people in the theatre don't seem as innocent as they may have first appeared. It's all very grey. Who are innocent and who are the enemy?

If you follow this train of thought, it's easy to see how a "If you're not with us, then you must be against us" mentality is born.

[kexodusc]

The terrorist don't follow Geneva, they don't play by the rules. If anyone thinks they can be contained, or defeated, or reasoned with by playing by the rules, they are dreaming.

They hide among the "innocent" because they wish to exploit the moral dilemma their military adversaries have to deal with when pointing a missile at a hospital, anything to get an edge. It works. I guarantee you if their enemies started bombing schools and hospitals in the first wave of retaliation, they wouldn't be there anymore. Of course the next step is to hide in their enemies' hospitals and schools instead of their own.

We view the deaths of innocent people and civilians as collateral damage, tragic and terrible. To them, there are no innocents - you're either loyal to the cause, or loyal to the enemy. People who are killed when a suicide bomber blows up a bus or school are revered as martyrs. It's the greatest honor. Foreign civilians are sympathizers responsible for electing the leaders they're at war with.

These religions have been fighting for centuries, both sides would rather sacrifice their lives than give up the battle to the aggressors. Western civilization doesn't understand this. It's nothing like dying for your country, or even your family - it's far beyond that to these people.

How do you defeat such an enemy with conventional warfare? You don't.
You either give in to their demands and hope they never ask for more (which I'm skeptical of based on my admittedly limited understanding of some countries' values of human rights and lack of tolerance) or you draw the line and play dirty yourself.

You're forced to choose the lesser of two evils pretty much.
I'll be blunt though, if it's "us" vs. "them", I'll pick "us" right or wrong every single time. Guess I'm just simple.

[shokhead]

Good point. If the innocents are really innocent and want to save themselves, they need to turn in the bad guys who are hiding amonst them.

The problem is, the people in the theatre (to continue with the previous example) may not think that Osama is a bad guy. They may support his actions and may be protecting him. In which case, that makes them a threat also. Suddenly the people in the theatre don't seem as innocent as they may have first appeared. It's all very grey. Who are innocent and who are the enemy?

If you follow this train of thought, it's easy to see how a "If you're not with us, then you must be against us" mentality is born.

Problem is the more innocents that die,the more they will turn on the side of the bad guys around them.

[trollgirl]

Problem is the more innocents that die,the more they will turn on the side of the bad guys around them.

Yes, it's a lose-lose situation for the common people on both sides.

"You can't fight for peace. You have to peace for peace." Peace as a verb - I like that.

Here is the Plan:
"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time." Albert Pike 1871

Albert Pike was high up in the Masonic organization here in the USA. What we are seeing unfolding has been planned for a long time. If any of you are curious as to what Pike said about World Wars one and two, I can post those quotes too.

Laz

[JoeE SP9]

I say shoot them all and let God sort it out :cornut: (And i mean all religious fanatics)
I'm with you on this one Flo. I've said before, we should neutron bomb the entire middle east. We should include Afghanistan and Iran in the bombing. Neutron bombs would kill only people and preserve the valuable infrastructure. Oh and while we're at it we should accidently drop a few on North Korea and get rid of that mess also.:incazzato:

[Florian]

Hey Florian is that a picture of your music room.It looks nice.I bet you sleep good at night knowing that a missle is not on it's way.
I wish that was my music room, but in this world women are competing against me with the same rights as me and this makes it hard for to me suceed.

-Flo

[Florian]

I'm with you on this one Flo. I've said before, we should neutron bomb the entire middle east. We should include Afghanistan and Iran in the bombing. Neutron bombs would kill only people and preserve the valuable infrastructure. Oh and while we're at it we should accidently drop a few on North Korea and get rid of that mess also.:incazzato:

Yep, i am sick of all this religious crap and this incl. the entire christianity all the same. :)

[markw]

Yes, it's a lose-lose situation for the common people on both sides.

"You can't fight for peace. You have to peace for peace." Peace as a verb - I like that.

Here is the Plan:
"The Third World War must be fomented by taking advantage of the differences caused by the "agentur" of the "Illuminati" between the political Zionists and the leaders of Islamic World. The war must be conducted in such a way that Islam (the Moslem Arabic World) and political Zionism (the State of Israel) mutually destroy each other. Meanwhile the other nations, once more divided on this issue will be constrained to fight to the point of complete physical, moral, spiritual and economical exhaustion…We shall unleash the Nihilists and the atheists, and we shall provoke a formidable social cataclysm which in all its horror will show clearly to the nations the effect of absolute atheism, origin of savagery and of the most bloody turmoil. Then everywhere, the citizens, obliged to defend themselves against the world minority of revolutionaries, will exterminate those destroyers of civilization, and the multitude, disillusioned with Christianity, whose deistic spirits will from that moment be without compass or direction, anxious for an ideal, but without knowing where to render its adoration, will receive the true light through the universal manifestation of the pure doctrine of Lucifer, brought finally out in the public view. This manifestation will result from the general reactionary movement which will follow the destruction of Christianity and atheism, both conquered and exterminated at the same time." Albert Pike 1871

Albert Pike was high up in the Masonic organization here in the USA. What we are seeing unfolding has been planned for a long time. If any of you are curious as to what Pike said about World Wars one and two, I can post those quotes too.

LazSounds sort of like the Tribulation.

[ForeverAutumn]

I wish that was my music room, but in this world women are competing against me with the same rights as me and this makes it hard for to me suceed.

-Flo

LMAO!

[JoeE SP9]

Yep, i am sick of all this religious crap and this incl. the entire christianity all the same. :)

All religions are silly!!!:ciappa:

[noddin0ff]

All religions are silly!!!:ciappa:

That's not true, the only silly religions are the ones that aren't mine.

[kexodusc]

That's not true, the only silly religions are the ones that aren't mine.
I don't think the religion has anything to do with it - I'm not aware that these religions are teaching war-making - it's people with other agendas introducing that. The religions are being twisted to manipulate people, undeniably, but as far as I can tell, the 3 Abrahamic faiths (Islam, Christianity, Judaism) all teach peace. Human nature is the corrupt party here - been plenty of non-religious tyrants as well.

[Geoffcin]

Were on the Lebanese side of the border! They were conducting some kind of raid when they were ambushed. Sort of like WMD, that really means nothing now.

[kexodusc]

Were on the Lebanese side of the border! They were conducting some kind of raid when they were ambushed. Sort of like WMD, that really means nothing now.
Just curious, what was your source? Everything international I've searched - including French news, still reports that Operation "Truthful Promise" was named after the plan to enter Israel to kidnap hostages for the sole purpose of negotiating the release of Lebanese prisoners - supposedly verified by Hezbollah.

I have little doubt there's a lot of bad info on this subject - surely both sides are interpreting events a bit differently as needed or desired, and it could very well be that Israeli's intercepted the invasion and followed them across the border - or that it was a pre-emptive strike - or exactly as you say.

Personally, I don't think the kidnapping is what set Israel off the 8 killed soldiers on Israeli soil (supposedly) as a result of an attack by Hezbollah probably would have triggered this retaliation on its own - Israel can't seriously expect to increase its chances of recovering the captives this way.

I'm a little surprised at how slow the rest of the world is moving on this.

And I'm dying to know what was in that letter the Germans received from Iran.

[shokhead]

I'm trying to figure out what Israeeli did wrong? Let there soldiers get kidnaped?

[Geoffcin]

Just curious, what was your source.

According to the Lebanese police force, the two soldiers were captured in Lebanese territory, in the area of Aïta Al-Chaab close to the border, whereas Israeli television indicated that they had been captured in Israeli territory.


http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/carte-finul.gif

[kexodusc]

Go figure!
Given the last 60 years of war in that region, it's nor a shock that there's 2 different accounts of what happened.

Okay, who's lying?

[noddin0ff]

I don't think the religion has anything to do with it - I'm not aware that these religions are teaching war-making - it's people with other agendas introducing that. The religions are being twisted to manipulate people, undeniably, but as far as I can tell, the 3 Abrahamic faiths (Islam, Christianity, Judaism) all teach peace. Human nature is the corrupt party here - been plenty of non-religious tyrants as well.

Well, in this case, it's probably all about religion, fundamentally. Everyone lays claim to the land because it is home to sites of great importance to the respective religions. In the US, it's the Christian right in the US that supports Israel because of the religious ties to Judaism. Layer historic claims to the land over on top of religion, and then layer political power and regional influence desires over that, and then throw in a mix of self interest and you get a mix that I don't understand.

Doing some Googling…

Lebanon is 40% Christian, 30% Sunni, and 30 Shiite. The Sunni+Christian majority is the more wealthy and better-educated population, and it is the combined majority that wants to rid Lebanon of Syrian influence. Hezbollah is popular with the poorer Shia community because Hezbollah promotes social services like schools and hospitals.

Hezbollah’s Shiite religion is modeled after that of Iranian Scholars. Hezbollah want the destruction of the state of Israel. Iran and Syria fund Hezbollah.

Hamas is Sunni, wants the destruction of Israel and the establishment of an Islamic Palestinian State where Israel is. Saudi Arabia is Sunni and funds Hamas

Egypt is Sunni and borders Gaza where the Hamas conflict is but wants Hamas to recognize Israel.

Lebanon and Syria both lay claim to land that Israel withdrew from in 2000. Syria wants to maintain political control over Lebanon and backs Hezbollah. I suppose because if it didn’t then the Christian and Sunni majority would run Lebanon. I guess the goal of Syria is to destabilize this majority.

The Lebonese civil war in the late 1970’s started I think because the French in the 1920’s created a Christian controlled government in Lebonan. The Christians were an actual majority then. But trying to understand the factions in this war is beyond me. It looks very complicated.

By fighting Shia Hezbollah in Lebanon, Israel could bolster the Christian and Sunni majorities that are generally more aligned with US and allies.

Iran is 90% Shia. Curiously, Syria is 75% Sunni (I can’t figure out this one). I don’t’ think the Lebanon-Syria friction is a religious conflict, just a power one. Except that Syria probably doesn’t want too strong of a Lebonese alignment with Judeo-Christian nations.

Iran is going nuclear, wants more influence in the region, funds Hezbollah, is going nuclear, wants to destroy Israel, is closely aligned with Syria, is going nuclear, funds Hamas as well so they can destroy Israel, is a Theocratic republic, is closely aligned with Syria, oh, and is going nuclear.


Anyway…just rambling while I try to educate myself.

[JoeE SP9]

Muslims in general want the end of Isreal. Along with that they want all Jews dead. Once they have accomplished that Christians and Catholics are next. Radical Muslims want a world like the Taliban had in Afghanistan. Remember, recently an Afhgani citizen was sentenced to death for converting to Christianity. Radical Muslims want a theocratic world government. One of the basic concepts of Islam is that church and state are the same. Radical Muslims are rapidly becomming the majority of Islamic followers.
Islam is the greatest threat to secular life that has ever existed.:incazzato:

[Florian]

Screw all religion. Seriously! I talked with a Christian mother of a friend and they all are so freaking closed in and limited in their mind by their religion. What man cannot explain is called a wonder and they use a symbol to describe it. Millions have died over religion, christians have raped and screwed little boys in their churches here in Europe. Offered a blessing on their sins when giving money etc.... Religion is the most single threat there. Well, let me reprhase. Public spreading of religion is a threat. And one thing is for sure.

God supposely gave us emotions, like love, hate, anger, happieness etc... If i ever reach Paradise where all is provided for me where there is only one emotion which is love and happieness then life is meaningless in the Paradise and i would rather take destruction of my soul

-Flo

[shokhead]

Screw all religion. Seriously! I talked with a Christian mother of a friend and they all are so freaking closed in and limited in their mind by their religion. What man cannot explain is called a wonder and they use a symbol to describe it. Millions have died over religion, christians have raped and screwed little boys in their churches here in Europe. Offered a blessing on their sins when giving money etc.... Religion is the most single threat there. Well, let me reprhase. Public spreading of religion is a threat. And one thing is for sure.

God supposely gave us emotions, like love, hate, anger, happieness etc... If i ever reach Paradise where all is provided for me where there is only one emotion which is love and happieness then life is meaningless in the Paradise and i would rather take destruction of my soul

-Flo

So one Christian person you talked to and dam them all? Sounds like one black guy or one Asian guy or one anything screws up and dam them all? What does that sound like?

[trollgirl]

Screw all religion. Seriously! I talked with a Christian mother of a friend and they all are so freaking closed in and limited in their mind by their religion. What man cannot explain is called a wonder and they use a symbol to describe it. Millions have died over religion, christians have raped and screwed little boys in their churches here in Europe. Offered a blessing on their sins when giving money etc.... Religion is the most single threat there. Well, let me reprhase. Public spreading of religion is a threat. And one thing is for sure.

God supposely gave us emotions, like love, hate, anger, happieness etc... If i ever reach Paradise where all is provided for me where there is only one emotion which is love and happieness then life is meaningless in the Paradise and i would rather take destruction of my soul

-Flo

...you should abandon Audio because some people own Bose or Soundesign gear. There is a vast gap between what I call Churchianity and true Christianity. I speak as a former athiest.

Laz

[Florian]

Hehe the typical defensive hold of a religious person. Seriously, i have Christian friends and i dont condem them all. I am sure Joe understand me....

[Mr Peabody]

I was watching some coverage on CNN today and they showed how Hezbalah rebuilt homes and schools after bombing and distruction. It also showed a mother and young daughter vowing alliance with Hezbalah because of the good they did for them. It's very difficult to stamp out an organization who is digging roots very deep into society. The "terrorists" are doing for the people what their government can't do. We've seen this type of thing in every country with organized crime or whatever. People are going to be loyal to those who take care of them. You can sometimes temporarily kill the tree but the roots produce a different one if roots are not completely dealt with.

I can't say if Isreal was right, but I do respect their action. The U.S. is in much of it's trouble because we talk sh*t. If you say something you'd better do it or else your respect is gone. In the words of Fred Durst, "don't write checks your *ss can't cash". That's why the U.N. is a worthless sham. They write resolutions that are rarely backed up. That's basically why a lot of this is going on. Those of you who have kids know that if there is no consequences for their actions they will run all over you and others they come into contact with. It's no different with dealing with anyone else.

Along the same lines, you also know that if you get your butt kicked for something you believe in, it still isn't going to change your mind.

I personally cannot remember the last fight I have been in but my philosophy is to avoid it if all possible but if it can't or I'm attacked, the other party will pay a heavy price for doing so. Or to put it another way I intend to inflict enough damage that you would never want to try it again. I would apply the same principle if I was the leader of a country.

[JoeE SP9]

Hehe the typical defensive hold of a religious person. Seriously, i have Christian friends and i dont condem them all. I am sure Joe understand me....
I do and I agree with you. I don't care what people believe. Just keep your beliefs to yourself. There are lots or people who don't believe the same or at all. Leave us to our beliefs or non-beliefs.

My problem with all religions is that you are required to belive without proof! This is what you call faith. It is what I call wishful thinking. Produce any proof at all and I will get on the same bus you are on.:ciappa:

[Mr Peabody]

The problem with religion is those who want to follow the religion are too lazy or have their own agenda, so they do not research and study the point of reference whether it's the Bible or some other writing. Those who are lazy take what is told to them for fact and are misled, those who have their own agenda take what is written and distort it to fit what they want to achieve or take things out of context. Just as an example, Catholics did not have access to the Bible until the recent century. It was read in Latin and they had to accept what was told to them. They have many practices that are not found in the Bible, as do many other "Christian" denominations. Most have a Creed they follow which was written by man. If you want to follow God, then follow what God has written. Those of you who denounce Faith totally should ponder why you believe in Socrates or Aristotile but not the Bible when there is actually more physical prove, as in validated historical writings, to prove the Bible than there is for the Greek scholars mentioned?

If the Isrealy soldiers were captured in Lebanon that puts things in a different perspective for me. That would seem more of a hazzard of the assignment more so than an agressive kidnapping.

[ForeverAutumn]

...you should abandon Audio because some people own Bose or Soundesign gear. There is a vast gap between what I call Churchianity and true Christianity. I speak as a former athiest.

Laz

I was going to stay out of the religious turn that this thread is taking but, Laz, you got me...I have to ask...

Former Athiest?

I've met lots of former religious people who are now atheists. I've met lots of former agnostics who have gone either way. But I think that you're the first former athiest that I've met (well, if you can call this meeting).

Do you mind if I ask what religion you practice now? And how you came to be a former athiest? As a lifetime Athiest (who was raised in a religious household), other people's religious beliefs actually fascinate me. If you'd prefer not to get into this discussion, feel free to ignore me. Or PM me if you'd rather have this discussion off-line.

[shokhead]

So dont talk about it but its ok to tell you not to talk about it. Abit one sided it seems. Good apples and bad apples.

[Geoffcin]

Of terrorist;

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,173-2277717,00.html

[JoeE SP9]

The problem with religion is those who want to follow the religion are too lazy or have their own agenda, so they do not research and study the point of reference whether it's the Bible or some other writing. Those who are lazy take what is told to them for fact and are misled, those who have their own agenda take what is written and distort it to fit what they want to achieve or take things out of context. Just as an example, Catholics did not have access to the Bible until the recent century. It was read in Latin and they had to accept what was told to them. They have many practices that are not found in the Bible, as do many other "Christian" denominations. Most have a Creed they follow which was written by man. If you want to follow God, then follow what God has written. Those of you who denounce Faith totally should ponder why you believe in Socrates or Aristotile but not the Bible when there is actually more physical prove, as in validated historical writings, to prove the Bible than there is for the Greek scholars mentioned?

If the Isrealy soldiers were captured in Lebanon that puts things in a different perspective for me. That would seem more of a hazzard of the assignment more so than an agressive kidnapping.

Belief in Socrates or Aristotle is not in any way faith based. Faith is the requirement to believe without proof. :ciappa:

[trollgirl]

I was going to stay out of the religious turn that this thread is taking but, Laz, you got me...I have to ask...

Former Athiest?

Do you mind if I ask what religion you practice now? And how you came to be a former athiest? As a lifetime Athiest (who was raised in a religious household), other people's religious beliefs actually fascinate me. If you'd prefer not to get into this discussion, feel free to ignore me. Or PM me if you'd rather have this discussion off-line.

FA: It's a very long story, and I may just PM you unless there is a chorus of people who also want to know...

Laz

[Mr Peabody]

Joe E, Socrates is not a religion but the point is, if you believe he existed and his writings are his, then why not believe in God or the Bible. We take much of history for granted, history books as true, but we were not there. I'm just trying to make the point that there are more original transcripts of books of the Bible than there are writings of Socrates. And why is it so hard to believe in God, when people believe so much more far fetched things. Faith actually can apply to anything you believe without seeing. When you jump out of a plane you have faith that parachute will open, or else you wouldn't jump...., I hope.:)

What people have a problem with when it comes to religion is that it involves changes in life, sacrafice and commitment, most of which make people turn and run. People can't even keep a diet which has to be a permanent change in eating habits. So what do most do, they make their own religion or find the one with the path of least resistance.

[GMichael]

The problem I have with organized religions is that most of them were written in a time when people believed in stories of sea monsters and dragons. That and that whole, "our religion is right and all the others are wrong" idea. Don't get me wrong, there is a lot of good that comes from it. And I do believe that there is a God. But it's not all good. Religion was written by man. A man's idea of what he or she thinks is the truth. I was taught about many "myths" when in school. But what makes one person's religion another person's myth?

[Resident Loser]

FA: It's a very long story, and I may just PM you unless there is a chorus of people who also want to know...

Laz

...heck, I'm not a chorus but I do sing harmony..that's a jump IMO...particularly since most religions I'm aware of are faith-based...and atheism strikes me as the ne plus ultra of doubting-Thomasism...

jimHJJ(...but what do you think of the Velvet Underground?...)

[JoeE SP9]

Joe E, Socrates is not a religion but the point is, if you believe he existed and his writings are his, then why not believe in God or the Bible. We take much of history for granted, history books as true, but we were not there. I'm just trying to make the point that there are more original transcripts of books of the Bible than there are writings of Socrates. And why is it so hard to believe in God, when people believe so much more far fetched things. Faith actually can apply to anything you believe without seeing. When you jump out of a plane you have faith that parachute will open, or else you wouldn't jump...., I hope.:)

What people have a problem with when it comes to religion is that it involves changes in life, sacrafice and commitment, most of which make people turn and run. People can't even keep a diet which has to be a permanent change in eating habits. So what do most do, they make their own religion or find the one with the path of least resistance.

If parachutists really had faith they would only have one chute. When I jumped out of airplanes while in the military I always had a backup chute.
I am reminded of something Bertrand Russell (athiest)once said. He was asked if he died and ended up standing before the throne of God and was asked by God "Why didn't you believe in me?" His response was "I would say to God you should have given better evidence". So, it comes down to faith ie: Belief without proof. I need proof.
I do not now nor have I ever believed that the Bible is the direct word of God. If it is then "God" is mean spirited capricious and intolerant. The biblical version of creation is simply not believable and the Bible just gets more unbelievable from there. Just consider, Noah and a breeding pair of every animal in a relatively small boat?
It is my observation that those who benefit the most from any organized religion are the priests ministers and assorted shamen who always live a cushier more comfortable life than their flocks.:cool:

[Mr Peabody]

This could really go on forever, but the Bible is much more believeable than the theory of evolution.

Russell reminds me of the rich man in Luke who found himself in Haites. Abraham told the rich man that if his family didn't believe Moses and the prophets, they won't believe one from the dead. Christ done many signs and wonders, as well as his apostles after His ascention into Heaven. Those were done so that those who saw would believe. At the time the Church was established the apostles could not just walk into town and hand out Bibles. They had help from the Holy Spirit who gave them many tools, ready recall, imparting of understanding by laying on of hands, speaking in many languages etc. Now that the Word has been put into print there is no need for these "tools". The gifts of the Holy Spirit went away when the apostles died. A study of the Bible will show that the apostles were the only ones who could pass on these gifts.

The arc was not relatively small and took many years to build. I'd have to check to get the exact dimensions but I think it was about 300 yards long and had more than on level.

There is so much proof around if you just look. Physics cannot explain how a Bee flies.

Jesus was poor as well. The only collection done in the New Testament church had a given purpose. Old Testament tithing was done to support the Levites who were the only ones who could be priests. It was NOT money for the most part, tithing was whatever your trade was, 10% of your crop, herd, eggs etc.

Those who cause confusion and pervert the Gospel are worse than any Pagan or unbeliever. One should study the New Testament Church that Christ established. You will see it is a far cry from the denominationalism that exists today. Just for instance, you will not see anyone instructed to celebrate Christmas or Easter. These are holidays established by the Roman ruler Contantine to promote growth in the church. He rolled many Pagan religions into biblical events to draw the Pagans in to convert. This type of thing is what has been going on and still goes on. Who are we to add to what God wants. We are instructed NOT to add to or take away from God's word. It is a fact in history that the original church DID NOT use instumental music. It wasn't until later centuries that instuments were introduced. We are told how to worship in the New Testament, I didn't see anyone play any instrument.

The New Testament fulfills so many prophecies from the Old that it would be impossible to be fabricated by man. The Old Testament way of doing things was nailed to the cross with Christ and we are to follow the New Testament today. It's still very relevant for our learning but it's the New Testament (Covenant) that instructs us in our lives and worship today.

I will not carry this on here. If I sparked any curiousity you can email me. I prefer email, PM is a pain.

[bobsticks]

..

jimHJJ(...but what do you think of the Velvet Underground?...)

Now that is laugh out loud funny...

[noddin0ff]

I don't believe in bees.

[GMichael]

I don't believe in bees.

I've talked with the queen bee. They don't believe in you either.:ciappa:

[PAT.P]

Who gives a F**K ! Im getting fed-up with the Middle East and we on the other side of the world pay for it at the pump.We should close our eyes and let them killed themself and their nation.We dont need them .Honestly I really think these Nation dont want to live in peace,fighting is their daily entertainment.:incazzato:

[kexodusc]

Physics cannot explain how a Bee flies.


Can now.
Turns out it's more like a helicoptor and less like a plane.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,181212,00.html

I'm sure science can be used to explain all confirmed observations if given enough time. I'm also sure that only God could create something so complex and amazing as the universe we inhabit.
And I'd like to think God didn't put everyone on the planet to kill each other in His name.
That's mankind's doing.

[daviethek]

[QUOTE=Mr Peabody]I was watching some coverage on CNN today and they showed how Hezbalah rebuilt homes and schools after bombing and distruction. It also showed a mother and young daughter vowing alliance with Hezbalah because of the good they did for them. It's very difficult to stamp out an organization who is digging roots very deep into society.

They are extremely organized and there are many agendas at work here. Religious fanaticism is only the fuel , the motivator for the masses. The final objective is economic equality. I've looked at this thing from many different perspectives and I am a simple guy and I keep coming back to money angle. The "Islamic" nations, Iran, Syria,Lebanon, Pakistan, are essentially undeveloped compared to the G-8. I can't help believe that death in the name of religion is nothing more than a "method" for the theocracies to muscle their way into the boardroom without paying any dues. They want a piece of the action in the world economy and see themselves as permanent slave states without it. Reeking havoc and waving the sword is much more fun than assembling Chevy Cobalts in Teheran. They think they can level the playing field with nuclear weapons. The Europeans are close at hand and reluctant to oppose them presently, with the exception of the Brits, who do stick their necks out for us.

[noddin0ff]

Yeah, the whole Christian world would've been better off if Elvis had never done that hip gyration thing-- a direct result of him being susceptible to, and heavily influenced by, gospel music. He seduced us all and now we’ve all lost our way and have to pay more for gas because the non-Christians are bombing themselves senseless in the Middle East. It’s all good though. More chaos means more lawlessness. More lawlessness means more piracy. And obviously, as the scriptures tell us, more piracy means more pirates ergo less global warming! (http://www.venganza.org/)

Anyhoo, with regards to

Who gives a F**K ! Im getting fed-up with the Middle East and we on the other side of the world pay for it at the pump.We should close our eyes and let them killed themself and their nation.We dont need them .Honestly I really think these Nation dont want to live in peace,fighting is their daily entertainment..

Probably the least insane comment made for a while in this thread since Flo jumped in. But really, common. Our gas dollars fund these regimes. If we’d been paying more attention to where our money was going and tried to make it buy infrastructures, schools, hospitals, roads, information flow…instead of lining the pockets of authoritarian rulers to contain nations aligned with governments we don’t like, you wouldn’t have a reason to fed up. But, whatever, drive on.

edit: relevant link added

[Mr Peabody]

Kex, thanks for that info.

[JoeE SP9]

This could really go on forever, but the Bible is much more believeable than the theory of evolution.

.


In what way?:ihih:

[ForeverAutumn]

What I'd really like to know is why Noah didn't let the Unicorns onto the arc? ;)

[ForeverAutumn]

If parachutists really had faith they would only have one chute. When I jumped out of airplanes while in the military I always had a backup chute.
I am reminded of something Bertrand Russell (athiest)once said. He was asked if he died and ended up standing before the throne of God and was asked by God "Why didn't you believe in me?" His response was "I would say to God you should have given better evidence". So, it comes down to faith ie: Belief without proof. I need proof.
I do not now nor have I ever believed that the Bible is the direct word of God. If it is then "God" is mean spirited capricious and intolerant. The biblical version of creation is simply not believable and the Bible just gets more unbelievable from there. Just consider, Noah and a breeding pair of every animal in a relatively small boat?
It is my observation that those who benefit the most from any organized religion are the priests ministers and assorted shamen who always live a cushier more comfortable life than their flocks.:cool:

You and I think a lot alike.

There is no scientific explanation for bees, therefore god must have created them. Thus god exists because bees exist is not a logical argument. Where's the scientific explanation for god?

[ForeverAutumn]

Joe E, Socrates is not a religion but the point is, if you believe he existed and his writings are his, then why not believe in God or the Bible. We take much of history for granted, history books as true, but we were not there. I'm just trying to make the point that there are more original transcripts of books of the Bible than there are writings of Socrates. And why is it so hard to believe in God, when people believe so much more far fetched things. Faith actually can apply to anything you believe without seeing. When you jump out of a plane you have faith that parachute will open, or else you wouldn't jump...., I hope.:)

What people have a problem with when it comes to religion is that it involves changes in life, sacrafice and commitment, most of which make people turn and run. People can't even keep a diet which has to be a permanent change in eating habits. So what do most do, they make their own religion or find the one with the path of least resistance.

Faith isn't believing that your parachute will open. Opening is what parachutes are built to do. Faith is believing that if your parachute malfunctions and doesn't open, god will save you because it's not your time to die. Or god won't save you because it is your time. If you really have faith in god, why wear a parachute at all?

[trollgirl]

Our gas dollars fund these regimes. If we’d been paying more attention to where our money was going and tried to make it buy infrastructures, schools, hospitals, roads, information flow…instead of lining the pockets of authoritarian rulers to contain nations aligned with governments we don’t like, you wouldn’t have a reason to fed up. But, whatever, drive on.

edit: relevant link added

Those of you who are old enough may recall that before the wells were capped, the North Slope (of Alaska) oil fields were said to contain sufficient oil to fuel North America for 200 years. However, they were capped and we now have rich Arabs, desperate Jews, unending war, expensive gas, and happy oilmen. Dead Lebanese are just icing on the cake. I'm sickened. I ask again: Did Israel make the right decision? Browse the web for some photos of dead Lebanese children before you answer. How can you say "Let God sort them out."?? Have you not considered that God will sort you out, too???

BTW "Peak Oil" is a scam to kick up oil prices. The Russians proved years ago that oil is being produced all the time, way down there. Americans can not drill as deep, and say oil is not down there. Lies...

BTW A military invasion takes TIME to plan and organize. Therefore, the recent invasion of Lebanon was decided on BEFORE the two IDF soldiers were captured. Duh. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were also planned prior to 9/11. If military action was really prompted by 9/11, Saudi would have gotten the hit. Lies...

BTW The US/UK/Zionist invasion of Iran will take place on schedule. The fallout will be dire. There will be more Lies...

BTW I see that no one has yet questioned the Albert Pike quote. Did anybody read it?

Laz

[rant over] Forever Autumn, I don't believe in Unicorns (bad translation in the OT) but YHWH did tell Noah to take examples of EVERY air breather on board the ark. Yes, the ark was very large, and had three levels. To save even more space, young, not mature, animals were taken. The Book of Jasher says more than Genesis on this. From time to time, an animal turns up that was thought to have gone extinct a LONG time ago. Most recently, the Laotian Rock Cat turned up - looks vaguely like an otter. The taxonomical family to which it belongs was thought to have been extinct for 11,000,000 years. This sort of thing happens more often than you may realize. Not too long ago, a species of tree was found in some remote part of Australia which was believed extinct for some tens of millions of years. The antediluvian world was not so long ago. Moist tissue has been found inside petrified T Rex bones, still red, still elastic, still with intact cells. Just don't hold your breath waiting for some big-name science publication to trumpet this news - they have theories to protect...

Laz

[trollgirl]

Where's the scientific explanation for god?

Science (properly understood) is a method, not ultimate truth. It can take you only so far, and science today (sadly) offers us many bad answers. This former athiest has found sufficient ground for belief in YHWH, but science and reason only took me so far. You have to take your hand off the fender of the vehicle which has taken you within view of the Unknown, and then walk toward the void. For me, it all began to unfold when I was still a non-believer, coaxed into going to church, and [you will laugh - I did not] during the Altar Call, a palpable force pushed me towards the aisle.

Laz

[noddin0ff]

I ask again: Did Israel make the right decision? Browse the web for some photos of dead Lebanese children before you answer. How can you say "Let God sort them out."?? Have you not considered that God will sort you out, too???

Which God? And, why not look at photo's of Israeli dead too?


BTW "Peak Oil" is a scam to kick up oil prices. The Russians proved years ago that oil is being produced all the time, way down there. Americans can not drill as deep, and say oil is not down there. Lies...
conspiracies

BTW A military invasion takes TIME to plan and organize. Therefore, the recent invasion of Lebanon was decided on BEFORE the two IDF soldiers were captured. Duh. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were also planned prior to 9/11. If military action was really prompted by 9/11, Saudi would have gotten the hit. Lies...
They would've been idiots not to plan this ahead. And, It's no super duper secret that the neocons had plans for invading Iraq before 9/11, but then I think one has to be daft to connect Iraq to 9/11. They weren't connected. Although the Bush Admin tried very hard to imply a connection. As for Afghanistan, um, Bin Laden who has accepted responsibility for 9/11 was being supported by the Taliban in Afghanistan. So your point is...it was a conspiracy to invade Afghanistan? What for? To get a US monopoly on opium??


BTW The US/UK/Zionist invasion of Iran will take place on schedule. The fallout will be dire. There will be more Lies...
I think it more likely that the nuclear attack by radical islamic fundamentalists funded by Iran is far far more likely.


From time to time, an animal turns up that was thought to have gone extinct a LONG time ago. Most recently, the Laotian Rock Cat turned up - looks vaguely like an otter. The taxonomical family to which it belongs was thought to have been extinct for 11,000,000 years. This sort of thing happens more often than you may realize. Not too long ago, a species of tree was found in some remote part of Australia which was believed extinct for some tens of millions of years. The antediluvian world was not so long ago. Moist tissue has been found inside petrified T Rex bones, still red, still elastic, still with intact cells. Just don't hold your breath waiting for some big-name science publication to trumpet this news - they have theories to protect...
Thinking something is extinct is not a theory. Thinking there was a big multi-tier boat that sustained all life on earth for 40 days is an act of faith. Presenting this as a logical argument for creationism is silly.

[kexodusc]

Those of you who are old enough may recall that before the wells were capped, the North Slope (of Alaska) oil fields were said to contain sufficient oil to fuel North America for 200 years.
I'm analyst for pipelines and utilities for our portfolio - all the companies I've visited agree nobody knows how much oil there is for certain, but the estimates I've heard put all of Alaska's oil at somewhere between enough for 5-12 years of fueling the USA. The problem being a sizeable portion is not recoverable. 200 years is a stretch of astrnomical proportions - think about it - that's more oil than the entire world has consumed so far. Ridiculous.



BTW A military invasion takes TIME to plan and organize. Therefore, the recent invasion of Lebanon was decided on BEFORE the two IDF soldiers were captured. Duh. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq were also planned prior to 9/11. If military action was really prompted by 9/11, Saudi would have gotten the hit. Lies...

You really should take the time to understand how the military works - simple military strategy for an invasion can be thrown together quite quickly - hours even. It's the deployment of trops that takes the longest time - I'm sure the military has contingency, "just in case" plans to attack every country in the world, and probably every city in the USA. That's what they do.
In Israel's case, they know the area well and have been on standby for war for a few decades now, likely planning, and re-planning such attacks periodically. Same goes for the other countries in the region. These armies are entrusted to be READY for the order. An attack could be launched in minutes - a pre-emptive strike by Israel is a unsubstantiated contention.


BTW The US/UK/Zionist invasion of Iran will take place on schedule. The fallout will be dire. There will be more Lies...
Maybe, but as long as they keep threatening the extinction of Israel and removal of Israeli's from the region, they'll get little sympathy.

Most people know there's 2 sides to every story - but for whatever reason you appear to be only acknowledging America's contributions to escalation. Plenty of blame to go around on all sides.

I suppose next you'll tell us Kim Jong Il is just a poor, misunderstood, philanthropist who was only planning a 4th of July celebration...until the American conspiracy machine got involved?

[kexodusc]

Kex, thanks for that info.
Sure,

Not sure what that discovery solves, but I got called on it just last week in a discussion about audio cables of all things - the objectivist was telling me science is absolute and LCR suggests all cables sound the same - I used the ol' "bee flying line" and he slapped a freakin' magazine article out of his briefcase on the table.

If someone figures out how to turn sh*t to champagne I'll have no snappy remarks left in my arsenal...

[dean_martin]

I'm analyst for pipelines and utilities for our portfolio - all the companies I've visited agree nobody knows how much oil there is for certain, but the estimates I've heard put all of Alaska's oil at somewhere between enough for 5-12 years of fueling the USA. The problem being a sizeable portion is not recoverable. 200 years is a stretch of astrnomical proportions - think about it - that's more oil than the entire world has consumed so far. Ridiculous.






My son just returned from a visit to Central Europe where he had an oppurtunity to go to OPEC headquarters in Vienna. His group heard a speech from an OPEC rep then they were allowed to ask questions. My son asked if OPEC funded research for alternative fuel sources. The rep went into a rant about the US ceasing oil drilling and production in Alaska because the US was going to wait until the world's supply was spent then the US could control the distribution and price of oil. Interesting perspective, eh?

[GMichael]

Whenever I go to the beach with the wifey, I always ask her if she's interested in off shore drilling.

[kexodusc]

My son just returned from a visit to Central Europe where he had an oppurtunity to go to OPEC headquarters in Vienna. His group heard a speech from an OPEC rep then they were allowed to ask questions. My son asked if OPEC funded research for alternative fuel sources. The rep went into a rant about the US ceasing oil drilling and production in Alaska because the US was going to wait until the world's supply was spent then the US could control the distribution and price of oil. Interesting perspective, eh?

Well, I'm sure it's possible - I won't pretend to know the politics - but I do know Alaska is a super expensive place to get oil from compared to most alternatives, so it's not good business yet. If supplies goes down, demand goes up, or both, suddenly becomes more worthwhile...but relative some other drilling spots, it'd still be a the last option. Canada's sitting back on the second largest oil reserve in the world (and has several others) as well - Russia's got gobs of it too. I think the logic here is to take care of your own if push comes to shove and stocks start to dwindle before we figure out how to make flying cars run on water...

Hopefully by then (or long before then) we'll get somewhere with other technologies to a point where the caps are off and we flood the market with cheap oil during the "transition" from oil to whatever. This would help insulate any massive shocks to the economy, not to mention really stick it to some of those countries that are completely dependant on oil.

[dean_martin]

Well, I'm sure it's possible - I won't pretend to know the politics - but I do know Alaska is a super expensive place to get oil from compared to most alternatives, so it's not good business yet.

Hey, Kex - my understanding has always been in line with what you state. I guess I was surprised (probably shouldn't have been) to learn that OPEC's position is different.

[trollgirl]

Which God? And, why not look at photo's of Israeli dead too?
Um...one man's perp is another man's victim.

conspiracies Yeah, no kidding.

As for Afghanistan, um, Bin Laden who has accepted responsibility for 9/11 was being supported by the Taliban in Afghanistan. So your point is...it was a conspiracy to invade Afghanistan? What for? To get a US monopoly on opium?? The Bin Laden family has had business dealings with the Bush family for years. The Khobar Towers were rebuilt by Bin Laden Brothers Construction. Yeah, no kidding. Remember when the men who became the Taliban were heroes in the West? However, they refused to give permission for a vital oil pipeline, and they were quickly demonized. You know the rest.


I think it more likely that the nuclear attack by radical islamic fundamentalists funded by Iran is far far more likely. We shall see...


Thinking something is extinct is not a theory. Thinking there was a big multi-tier boat that sustained all life on earth for 40 days is an act of faith. Presenting this as a logical argument for creationism is silly. The reappearance of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker demonstrates that "thinking something is extinct" IS a theory. A theory, by definition, can be (and here has) been falsified. What were you trying to say? "Thinking there was a big multi-tier boat that sustained all life [no, only air breathing animals] on earth for 40 days [no, actually a couple of years] is an act of faith." An act of faith now, yes, soon a fact of proven history. The ark has been, and is now, coming to light. Arguments for Creationism have put forward by men and women much more brilliant than your truly.

Laz

[trollgirl]

I'm analyst for pipelines and utilities for our portfolio - all the companies I've visited agree nobody knows how much oil there is for certain, but the estimates I've heard put all of Alaska's oil at somewhere between enough for 5-12 years of fueling the USA. The problem being a sizeable portion is not recoverable. 200 years is a stretch of astrnomical proportions - think about it - that's more oil than the entire world has consumed so far. Ridiculous.

You really should take the time to understand how the military works - simple military strategy for an invasion can be thrown together quite quickly - hours even. It's the deployment of trops that takes the longest time - I'm sure the military has contingency, "just in case" plans to attack every country in the world, and probably every city in the USA. That's what they do.
In Israel's case, they know the area well and have been on standby for war for a few decades now, likely planning, and re-planning such attacks periodically. Same goes for the other countries in the region. These armies are entrusted to be READY for the order. An attack could be launched in minutes - a pre-emptive strike by Israel is a unsubstantiated contention.

Maybe, but as long as they keep threatening the extinction of Israel and removal of Israeli's from the region, they'll get little sympathy.

Most people know there's 2 sides to every story - but for whatever reason you appear to be only acknowledging America's contributions to escalation. Plenty of blame to go around on all sides.

I suppose next you'll tell us Kim Jong Il is just a poor, misunderstood, philanthropist who was only planning a 4th of July celebration...until the American conspiracy machine got involved?

Kex, your comments on oil are worth while, and the claim of 200 years may well have been hype or an urban legend. However the proven fact of abiotic oil makes it moot. There's oil aplenty. Your assumption that I don't understand how the military works might merely rest on not having noted that I said "plan and organize". I understand every thing you say in that paragraph. Remember what Brecht said: "When the leaders speak of peace, the mobilization orders have already been written out." "Maybe, but as long as they keep threatening the extinction of Israel and removal of Israeli's from the region, they'll get little sympathy." Yes, but like you say yourself, there are two sides - the Zionist State is now threatening the extinction of its neighbors and the removal of Palestinians from the region. They are running out of sympathy all over the world, and maybe you have noticed. They have cried "Wolf!" too many times. Yes, there's plenty of blame to go around, but we Americans should face our share squarely, and be more humble. BTW, I don't care a fig for Kim Jong Il...

Laz

[ForeverAutumn]

The reappearance of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker demonstrates that "thinking something is extinct" IS a theory. A theory, by definition, can be (and here has) been falsified. What were you trying to say? "Thinking there was a big multi-tier boat that sustained all life [no, only air breathing animals] on earth for 40 days [no, actually a couple of years] is an act of faith." An act of faith now, yes, soon a fact of proven history. The ark has been, and is now, coming to light. Arguments for Creationism have put forward by men and women much more brilliant than your truly.

Laz

Finding evidence that a boat existed over 2000 years ago, doesn't prove that Noah saved the animals on the word of god. It only proves that a boat existed over 2000 years ago.

[JoeE SP9]

The reappearance of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker demonstrates that "thinking something is extinct" IS a theory. A theory, by definition, can be (and here has) been falsified. What were you trying to say? "Thinking there was a big multi-tier boat that sustained all life [no, only air breathing animals] on earth for 40 days [no, actually a couple of years] is an act of faith." An act of faith now, yes, soon a fact of proven history. The ark has been, and is now, coming to light. Arguments for Creationism have put forward by men and women much more brilliant than your truly.

Laz
What credible scientist has argued in favor of creationism? Please state name, credentials and papers published for peer review in a reputable journal.
If creationism is fact then the evidence is totally misleading. That doesn't say much for a supreme being who would plant false or misleading information. I once tried to discuss carbon dating with a "creation" science believer. He didn't believe in carbon dating. I tried to explain, if radioactive decay did not occur as science says then atomic bombs and power wouldn't work.:ihih:

[kexodusc]

Kex, your comments on oil are worth while, and the claim of 200 years may well have been hype or an urban legend. However the proven fact of abiotic oil makes it moot. There's oil aplenty. Your assumption that I don't understand how the military works might merely rest on not having noted that I said "plan and organize". I understand every thing you say in that paragraph. Remember what Brecht said: "When the leaders speak of peace, the mobilization orders have already been written out."

Yes, but like you say yourself, there are two sides - the Zionist State is now threatening the extinction of its neighbors and the removal of Palestinians from the region. They are running out of sympathy all over the world, and maybe you have noticed. They have cried "Wolf!" too many times. Yes, there's plenty of blame to go around, but we Americans should face our share squarely, and be more humble. BTW, I don't care a fig for Kim Jong Il...

Laz
I don't think anyone disagrees there's plenty of oil. The supply of which is "controlled" by cartels with self-serving interests. And before you blame it on the USA, remember who struck the first blow. Opec's been rigging their supply/production scheme for decades now - when supply is down, its rare that Russia, Venezuela (before joining Opec) or Canada or the US would boost production to compensate - they don't want their supplies depleted sooner because of an artificial, politically motivated decrease in supply. So they all sit on their oil, staring at each other, while the consumer pays a bit more. Oddly enough, Saudi Arabia usually plays the role of peace-maker in these situations.

Something will replace oil as the primary source of fuel long before all oil stocks are exhausted - I think a lot of companies are betting on this - There's a lot of reseves that are full of oil, but would be absolutely huge, capital intensive, decade or more long projects that would take years of revenue streams to pay for...What's more, the oil that we get out of the ground is getting more and more difficult to refine into more usuable forms. And refining is a massive part of the end-user costs these days - let's not forget that. So the decision to drill often requires over 20 years of accurate foresight. You honestly can't blame the companies - the consumers and governments ask them to find oil, pay for getting it out of the ground, so they want some guarantee that there'll still be reasonable demand for however long it takes to recover costs.

Is it unthinkable that oil demand in 20 years could be vastly reduced? I dont' think so - as long as there's an ambitious car company or technology firm that wants to take the money that consumers give to gas companies, there'll be work on more efficient engines and alternative energy sources.

What's all this got to do with Israel and Lebanon? Not much - as the vast majority of those folks don't benefit at all from Oil. This a centuries old religious and territorial war. The fundamental teachings of the religions on both sides create a sense of "Promise" or entitlement to the land. The only solutions I can see is to remove one side, or the other from the region - which both sides would die for to prevent - or to beat this sense of entitlement into submission and let these guys duke it out. Lose/lose situation. But we helped put Israel there, so we have to support them now. How many other countries have we meddled with, and then abandonned to slaughter (Iraq, Cuba, Rwanda, etc).

I find it ironic that middle east sympathizers point out that the reason people become "terrorists" and attack the US is because they can only put up with so many acts of provocation against them before they snap - US foreign policy or otherwise - and that we should expect strong retaliation from these people because "they can only take so much".
Israel's peoples' history is full of persecution and attacks, probably as much or moreso than any other people on Earth. It may not be justifiable, but at least I can understand their actions - they're not going to wait for things to escalate to a point where the international community justifies their decision to create war. History has forced them to believe they can't. And that history is in their blood, dating back even long before there was a United States of America.

[markw]

Actually, the terrorist orgsanizations are funded by the oil producing countries. So, while the desert dwelling peoples don't "benefit" from the oil monies, it's not because it's not there. They don't benefit from it because their rulers simply keep most of it for themselves and drop a goodly amount in making life difficult for the rest of the world by funding terrorist organizations. Educating their people is not high on their priorities.

It's not like these countries have anything else on which to base their GNP.

Actually, if they used theuir heads they might notice that Israel can rework the barran desert into fertile grounds that not only produce enough food to feed themselves, but actually produce excess food that can be exported. You would think they would want to learn from them. But no, they would rather destroy them

[kexodusc]

Actually, the terrorist orgsanizations are funded by the oil producing countries. So, while the desert dwelling peoples don't "benefit" from the oil monies, it's not because it's not there. They don't benefit from it because their rulers simply keep most of it for themselves and drop a goodly amount in making life difficult for the rest of the world by funding terrorist organizations. Educating their people is not high on their priorities. That's exactly the point I was making...I think most of the people would prefer to live life without all the bloodshed (giving them the benefit of the doubt here, the Saudi's are UAE are fairly moderate) but the regimes in control of the state owned oil companies tend to rally the civilians to their causes...when you're poor and things aren't going as well - it's easy to believe the big bad US tyrant imperialists are responsible for this mess.


Actually, if they used theuir heads they might notice that Israel can rework the barran desert into fertile grounds that not only produce enough food to feed themselves, but actually produce excess food that can be exported. You would think they would want to learn from them. But no, they would rather destroy them
Hmmm, maybe. Israel historically was known as a very fertile land, but over thousands of years of intense war, capture, and recapture, the invaders and the losing sides of these wars salted/poisoned the lands to make it hard on the other side. Still, it always had potential, just needed some reconstruction Nothing like destroying the sacred ground.

As far as I know, most of the other desert lands are pretty much limited. Once oil loses is precious commodity value, these countries will have nothing left. You don't see Syria investing in mass infrastructure and technological development. Well, unless you believe Iran is developing high grade plutonium for "peaceful purposes".

[noddin0ff]

Which God? And, why not look at photo's of Israeli dead too?
Um...one man's perp is another man's victim.
Personally, I think they're all victims. Just curious why you don't seem to care about Israeli civilians who fall victim to suicide bombers and missles.


The Bin Laden family has had business dealings with the Bush family for years. The Khobar Towers were rebuilt by Bin Laden Brothers Construction. Yeah, no kidding. Remember when the men who became the Taliban were heroes in the West? However, they refused to give permission for a vital oil pipeline, and they were quickly demonized. You know the rest.
Yeah, I know the rest. That last part especially about flying planes full of civilians into tall buildings full of more civilians. That all came some time after bombing some marines in Lebanon though. etc.



The reappearance of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker demonstrates that "thinking something is extinct" IS a theory. A theory, by definition, can be (and here has) been falsified. What were you trying to say? "Thinking there was a big multi-tier boat that sustained all life [no, only air breathing animals] on earth for 40 days [no, actually a couple of years] is an act of faith." An act of faith now, yes, soon a fact of proven history. The ark has been, and is now, coming to light. Arguments for Creationism have put forward by men and women much more brilliant than your truly.
I don’t doubt that ancient cultures built a box that they believed God resided in [edit: oops, wrong ark, my mistake]. But that has little to do with bombing civilians or with creationist ramblings.

You are confusing your use of the word 'theory' with the meaning it has when used in a scientific context. What you are calling a 'theory' would be more accurately referred to as a 'hypothesis', which is a stronger form of conjecture, which is stronger than speculation (which hovers around 'conspiracy theory'). A hypothesis is a notion based on observations, from which one infers statements of potential truth. (we can't find living birds but we do find evidence that they existed not long ago, they likely are extinct now). A hypothesis in a scientific context is a testable conjecture. Testing a hypothesis requires discipline, skepticism, and knowledge of the difference between bias, observation, and belief. In a scientific context the hypothesis, the methods applied to test it, and the conclusions drawn, are reviewed by other knowledgeable experts, most of whom would be happy to prove you wrong.

A scientific theory has more power. It is a notion that is derived from tested hypothesis, known facts, laws of nature. A scientific theory is well substantiated with repeated observations. It often creates an organized system of accepted knowledge that has power to explain phenomena in a variety of circumstances. Yes a scientific theory (like Gravity or Evolution) could be proved wrong, but because they are assembled from mountains off well tested and well reviewed knowledge it is highly unlikely. Theories are consistent will all known information and generally have predictive power as well. Creationism has none of that (but of course you’re free to believe that it does). Now if you want to argue that finding a missing bird invalidates the whole theory of evolution. I can't help you until you decide to start using your rational brain. Form a hypothesis about how finding animals once believed extinct disproves the theory of evolution and test it.

[Resident Loser]

...is quite popular and generates a great deal of traffic but, can we possibly get someone to correct the spelling of "ISREAL" to Israel...

Every time it pops up due to the addition of another post, it drives me nuckin' futs!!!

jimHJJ(...puh-leeeese...)

[ForeverAutumn]

...is quite popular and generates a great deal of traffic but, can we possibly get someone to correct the spelling of "ISREAL" to Israel...

Every time it pops up due to the addition of another post, it drives me nuckin' futs!!!

jimHJJ(...puh-leeeese...)

Ooops! My bad. I'd be happy to correct it if the software used for this forum would allow me to edit the thread title, but it doesn't. So, you'll have to see whether one of our esteemed Mods can do it. Otherwise, it'll be a short trip to the loony bin for you. :crazy:

[Geoffcin]

Science (properly understood) is a method, not ultimate truth. It can take you only so far, and science today (sadly) offers us many bad answers. This former athiest has found sufficient ground for belief in YHWH, but science and reason only took me so far. You have to take your hand off the fender of the vehicle which has taken you within view of the Unknown, and then walk toward the void. For me, it all began to unfold when I was still a non-believer, coaxed into going to church, and [you will laugh - I did not] during the Altar Call, a palpable force pushed me towards the aisle.

Laz

http://www.southflorida.com/news/chi-0607190265jul19,0,330718.story

[trollgirl]

Personally, I think they're all victims. Just curious why you don't seem to care about Israeli civilians who fall victim to suicide bombers and missles.


Yeah, I know the rest. That last part especially about flying planes full of civilians into tall buildings full of more civilians. That all came some time after bombing some marines in Lebanon though. etc.



I don’t doubt that ancient cultures built a box that they believed God resided in [edit: oops, wrong ark, my mistake]. But that has little to do with bombing civilians or with creationist ramblings.

You are confusing your use of the word 'theory' with the meaning it has when used in a scientific context. What you are calling a 'theory' would be more accurately referred to as a 'hypothesis', which is a stronger form of conjecture, which is stronger than speculation (which hovers around 'conspiracy theory'). A hypothesis is a notion based on observations, from which one infers statements of potential truth. (we can't find living birds but we do find evidence that they existed not long ago, they likely are extinct now). A hypothesis in a scientific context is a testable conjecture. Testing a hypothesis requires discipline, skepticism, and knowledge of the difference between bias, observation, and belief. In a scientific context the hypothesis, the methods applied to test it, and the conclusions drawn, are reviewed by other knowledgeable experts, most of whom would be happy to prove you wrong.

A scientific theory has more power. It is a notion that is derived from tested hypothesis, known facts, laws of nature. A scientific theory is well substantiated with repeated observations. It often creates an organized system of accepted knowledge that has power to explain phenomena in a variety of circumstances. Yes a scientific theory (like Gravity or Evolution) could be proved wrong, but because they are assembled from mountains off well tested and well reviewed knowledge it is highly unlikely. Theories are consistent will all known information and generally have predictive power as well. Creationism has none of that (but of course you’re free to believe that it does). Now if you want to argue that finding a missing bird invalidates the whole theory of evolution. I can't help you until you decide to start using your rational brain. Form a hypothesis about how finding animals once believed extinct disproves the theory of evolution and test it.

Let me take this point by point:

First I'm sorry for the one post above, where I replied to one of your posts, got it
hopelessly garbled, and then could not manage to delete it.

I do care about Israeli civilians, and I know they die too, but the MSM covers their plight all too well. I just try to balance the bias...

Yes, we all know that planes full of people flew into towers full of more people, but there is much to ponder about 9/11, much more than that most of the "terrorists" were Saudis, and several of them are alive and well today (kind of like the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker). Consider that the WTC Towers were built to withstand such impacts, that the steel was UL rated to withstand more heat than the jet fual could generate, and for longer than the fuel burned. Most of it burned in external fireballs anyway, especially the second hit, for which the building went down first - inexplicable. My bottom line, I have seen controlled demolitions live and on video. I know what to look for. In videos of the WTC Towers coming down, you can SEE the cutting charges going off. There is no mistake, so don't even argue with me, just go watch one of the videos. I predict someone will post and say, "I watched it several times, and didn't see it." We're not all blessed with the ability to SEE what we're looking at - sorry! Besides, the Leaseholder spilled the beans when he admitted that he told the NYFD to "Pull" Building 7. That's industry slang for taking it down with a controlled demolition. I could go on for pages and pages with FACTS, but how many of you will believe it? I propose that some of you are deceived. You won't believe that, either...

The next paragraph I don't care to dignify...

Now, the theory thing. I can see that our scientific philosophies are very different. You seem to put "theory" almost on a level with a Law of Nature. I do not. To me, a theory should always be testable and falsifiable. If new evidence comes along which flatly contradicts it, the theory, however cherished, should go, not the evidence. That was my whole point,and you did not have to go into a sci/phil rant. I just said that the reappearance of the Ivory-Billed Woodpecker chucks the theory that they are extinct. OR, in your view, since their continuted existence has not been (as far as I know) formally announced, we should still consider them extinct? Me rational? Oh, yes...

BTW, to answer a question on another post, here is one: the late, great Henry M. Morris, PhD, Hydologist by trade and with plenty of papers to his name in a long career. He wrote or co-wrote many of the classics in the Creationist Movement. He was well respected. Another is Duane T. Gish, who I have seen hold his own in debates with evolutionists. The whole trouble is that the theory of Evolution sits itself up as a gate-keeper, much as the AMA does against Homeopathy. Homeopathy is backed by a huge amount of research, their theory is sound, their method is sophisticated. But to the AMA, or the AMA-minded, they're just a little weird, you know... My bottom line is that Evolution and Creation are both scientific/intellectual/philosophical GIANTS duking it out, but one side is respectful, and the other side insists on treating the opposition as nut-cases. There are issues here, and not of the scientific kind. As I said elsewhere, money, power, and good science are a bad mix.

Please DO NOT read things I have not said into the above. Understanding what I do say seems rare without that...

Laz

[trollgirl]

Finding evidence that a boat existed over 2000 years ago, doesn't prove that Noah saved the animals on the word of god. It only proves that a boat existed over 2000 years ago.

[inserts tongue into cheek]

So I assume that if you found some flint arrowheads, you would deny that Indians hunted with them...

Laz

OK, OK, I'll take the slap...

[trollgirl]

If creationism is fact then the evidence is totally misleading. That doesn't say much for a supreme being who would plant false or misleading information. I once tried to discuss carbon dating with a "creation" science believer. He didn't believe in carbon dating. I tried to explain, if radioactive decay did not occur as science says then atomic bombs and power wouldn't work.:ihih:

JoeE, the whole problem here is that you have one paradigm, and the creationist you were talking to has another. I gather that you are not well versed in creationist literature and ideas. I am familiar with both paradigms, and I know where this fellow is coming from. You put him down for his (to you) weird ideas, but keep in mind that to him YOUR ideas/concepts are weird. Two theories. Two worlds. Two universes. The two sides seem to, but do not entirely speak the same language.

Conventional Science is going down, and the struggle between Evolution and Creation is really old hat. The new battles forming up are between Classic Physics and Hyper Dimensional Physics - few even have heard of it. Also, the Electric Universe Hypothesis is rapidly gaining ground, and is so new, the alarms are probably not even ringing yet in ivy-clad academia. Stay tuned...

Laz

[ForeverAutumn]

[inserts tongue into cheek]

So I assume that if you found some flint arrowheads, you would deny that Indians hunted with them...

Laz

OK, OK, I'll take the slap...

If finding arrowheads was the only evidence, then I would say that finding the arrowheads does not prove that Indians hunted with them.

You could certainly build a theory around what purpose the arrowheads might have served, but it would not be proof. The proof would come in other empirical evidence... As examples: Drawings or artwork by the Indians of them using arrows to hunt; animal DNA found on the arrows; or markings on animal bones or remains that are consistant with the arrows.

If someone were to actually find evidence of a boat on Mt. Ararat, you could design a theory about how it got there. And you might even convince me to believe your theory (not likely, however), but it's not empirical proof that it was Noah's boat.

[Mr Peabody]

What I don't understand is why when Isreal goes to war in the Middle East, why the rest of the world seems to think there must be some kind of cease fire? It just seems to be treated differently than when the U.S. invaded Iraq or other past conflicts between whatever country. Countries usually put out a statement either condemning or saying, "well it's justified", or ignore it all together, but with Isreal, there has to be all these meetings to try to hammer out a resolution to have a truse. It's like the rules for the rest of the world don't seem to apply for the Middle East. Maybe that's a bad thing. Maybe the world should try to intervene to stop any fighting between all countries. Maybe I don't have the whole picture but if I was Isreal, I'd be offended by countries trying to tell me not to do something when they have all mostly done the same thing themselves.

[markw]

What I don't understand is why when Isreal goes to war in the Middle East, why the rest of the world seems to think there must be some kind of cease fire? It just seems to be treated differently than when the U.S. invaded Iraq or other past conflicts between whatever country. Countries usually put out a statement either condemning or saying, "well it's justified", or ignore it all together, but with Isreal, there has to be all these meetings to try to hammer out a resolution to have a truse. It's like the rules for the rest of the world don't seem to apply for the Middle East. Maybe that's a bad thing. Maybe the world should try to intervene to stop any fighting between all countries. Maybe I don't have the whole picture but if I was Isreal, I'd be offended by countries trying to tell me not to do something when they have all mostly done the same thing themselves.Most of the world seems fine when Israel takes missles and bombings but when they retaliate it's a different story.

Most of the world would like to see Israel gone.

[bobsticks]

[QUOTE=kexodusc]...when you're poor and things aren't going as well - it's easy to believe the big bad US tyrant imperialists are responsible for this mess.

. Kexo is correct.

Qu'ran:33:26 "Allah made the Jews leave their homes by terrorizing them so that you killed some and made many captive. And he made you inherit their lands, their homes, and their wealth. He gave you a country that you had not transversed before."

Does anyone actually believe that the majority of Muslims would ascribe to this?
To place it in American context, how many would support unto the peril of their souls some of the headier excerpts from Exodus--the stoning of adulterers, the selling of daughters into slavery, etc.? Millions of Muslims throughout the world abhor what is being contorted from modernistic Islam.
But when the clerics in the madrassahs teach the above they are not speaking to enlightened minds. They are inculcating hate upon the poorest and most hopeless. There is no mention of science or mathematics, linguistics or engineering. This is the politics of power and manipulation. And the problem grows more complex when it is the case, as stated, that these regions lack the basic infrastructure and natural resource base to sustain any non oil-based growth. As we have seen in the American experience, it is also true that the lower classes have the most offspring, and thus the cycle continues.

Qu'ran: 8:39 " So, fight them till all opposition ends and the only religion is Islam"

That is the message inundating the youth of disenfranchised Islam, delivered by parents, political leaders, spiritual figures, and peers. Obviously effective but just a means to an end--the maintenance of the moneyed and powered elite...

[JoeE SP9]

JoeE, the whole problem here is that you have one paradigm, and the creationist you were talking to has another. I gather that you are not well versed in creationist literature and ideas. I am familiar with both paradigms, and I know where this fellow is coming from. You put him down for his (to you) weird ideas, but keep in mind that to him YOUR ideas/concepts are weird. Two theories. Two worlds. Two universes. The two sides seem to, but do not entirely speak the same language.

Conventional Science is going down, and the struggle between Evolution and Creation is really old hat. The new battles forming up are between Classic Physics and Hyper Dimensional Physics - few even have heard of it. Also, the Electric Universe Hypothesis is rapidly gaining ground, and is so new, the alarms are probably not even ringing yet in ivy-clad academia. Stay tuned...

Laz

I didn't want to mention string theory or "branes".:ihih:

[JoeE SP9]

[quote=trollgirl
BTW, to answer a question on another post, here is one: the late, great Henry M. Morris, PhD, Hydologist by trade and with plenty of papers to his name in a long career.

What is a Hydologist? I can't find any reference to that title anywhere.:confused:

[trollgirl]

[quote=trollgirl
BTW, to answer a question on another post, here is one: the late, great Henry M. Morris, PhD, Hydologist by trade and with plenty of papers to his name in a long career.

What is a Hydologist? I can't find any reference to that title anywhere.:confused:

I should have said/spelled "Hydrologist". Only one letter off, but as I get older, I must pay more and more attention to something I was once excellent at. String theory? It's too far "out there" to interest me. What about them "branes"? Wuzzat??

Laz

[JoeE SP9]

Laz, I thought I responded to your last post. This site is telling me I didn't. It may be the Beta version of IE I'm currently testing. "Branes" relate to string theory which suggests that different realities exist on "membranes". String theory suggests that the big bang was two "branes" touching at only one spot. The result being the "brane" we exist on.:idea:

[trollgirl]

...and heck, my brother-in-law worries that I think the unthinkable. I dig the search for Atlantis, ancient technology, life on Mars, various conspiracies, history, theology, lots of subjects. However, when I sense that a theory is merely a mental construct, divorced from reality, I lose interest.

Laz

[noddin0ff]

However, when I sense that a theory is merely a mental construct, divorced from reality, I lose interest.

kind of like the existence of God? ;-)

I know, cheap shot...but it is the Steel Cage...

[ForeverAutumn]

However, when I sense that a theory is merely a mental construct, divorced from reality, I lose interest.
kind of like the existence of God? ;-)

I know, cheap shot...but it is the Steel Cage...

LOL! :lol:

(Sorry Laz, but that was funny)

[Feanor]

As things in the Middle East have progressed over the last week, I can't help but think back to our conversation a short while ago when two US soldiers were killed and beheaded, about whether the US should have retaliated and, if so, how?

So, did Isreal do the right thing when two of their soldiers were captured? Is this how the US should have responded when it happened to them? What are your thoughts on the current situation in the Middle East?

The only thing that will quarantee security for Isreal in the long run is peace with its neighbours, including the Palestinians. I've said this for 40 years. It would involve consessions from Isreal followed by acceptance by the other parties.

But Isreal has never been prepared to make meaningful consessions. How come? Basically is that they feel they are negociating from strength: military if not moral. Why given in while we're winning they ask, (implicitly)? But you aren't "winning" if you can't win in the end. And Isreal can't bring the issue to an end using the strategies they have.

There is a lot of hypocracy in Isreal's position. They say, "Palestine Authority, get rid of Hammas, and we'll talk". And they say, "Lebanese Government, get rid of Hezbullah, and we'll leave". Apart from the fact that these supposed authorities simply cannot do those things, whose histoic actions motivated and gave pretext for these organizations? The answer this question is complex, but it begins with the Zionist movement.

[JoeE SP9]

The only thing that will quarantee security for Isreal in the long run is peace with its neighbours, including the Palestinians. I've said this for 40 years. It would involve consessions from Isreal followed by acceptance by the other parties.

But Isreal has never been prepared to make meaningful consessions. How come? Basically is that they feel they are negociating from strength: military if not moral. Why given in while we're winning they ask, (implicitly)? But you aren't "winning" if you can't win in the end. And Isreal can't bring the issue to an end using the strategies they have.

There is a lot of hypocracy in Isreal's position. They say, "Palestine Authority, get rid of Hammas, and we'll talk". And they say, "Lebanese Government, get rid of Hezbullah, and we'll leave". Apart from the fact that these supposed authorities simply cannot do those things, whose histoic actions motivated and gave pretext for these organizations? The answer this question is complex, but it begins with the Zionist movement.

How can you negotiate with a group that denies your right to exist?:confused5:

[Feanor]

How can you negotiate with a group that denies your right to exist?:confused5:

The "negociation" always needed to be with the Palistinian people, not necessarily with Hammas or Hizbullah. The situation now is that these extremist groups increasingly have come to represent the majority of Palistinians. The recalcitrant Isreali attitude drove them to increasingly more extreme positions. Isreal has largely sqandered to possibility of dealing with moderate Arab opinion.

What can be done now? I don't know. Perhaps stronger UN intervention than has been tried in the past is possible, but past measures haven't been very helpful. What I do know is that Isreal cannot "win" by force. And they should not be encouraged to try; the US needs to end (or threaten to, for a start), military assitance to Isreal worth upwards of $2 billion a year. Instead, the US might, say, quaranteed against invasion by neighbouring states. If Isreal cannot deal with that reality, then let the chips fall where they may.

[JoeE SP9]

Israel should use some of their nukes and bomb the rest of the Middle East. The only way to have peace there and by extension the world is to get rid of Muslims.:ihih:

[Feanor]

Israel should use some of their nukes and bomb the rest of the Middle East. The only way to have peace there and by extension the world is to get rid of Muslims.:ihih:

Yep, sounds like the "final solution" to me. :cornut:

Or the US could nuke Isreal and be heros to the Muslim world, take your pick.
:idea: Let's do some math: 6 million Isrealis, (some of them Arab, granted), or 1.126 billion Muslims. Which would yield the greater approbation?

[Geoffcin]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060714_chris_hedges_mutually_assured_destruction/

[Feanor]

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060714_chris_hedges_mutually_assured_destruction/

Anyone paying attention?

Is the situation beyond redemption? Perhaps it is.

[Geoffcin]

Anyone paying attention?

Is the situation beyond redemption? Perhaps it is.

If there ever was a time for devine intervention this is it.

[GMichael]

Yep, sounds like the "final solution" to me. :cornut:

Or the US could nuke Isreal and be heros to the Muslim world, take your pick.
:idea: Let's do some math: 6 million Isrealis, (some of them Arab, granted), or 1.126 billion Muslims. Which would yield the greater approbation?

Sounds good on paper. But I can't help feeling that some radical Muslim extremist (is that redundant?) would point to this act as final proof that America is a heartless devil, bent on destroying the world. "See what they did to our poor neighbors?"

[kexodusc]

Sounds good on paper. But I can't help feeling that some radical Muslim extremist (is that redundant?) would point to this act as final proof that America is a heartless devil, bent on destroying the world. "See what they did to our poor neighbors?"

There's no moral authority for nuking anyone in this case. I hope everyone is "joking" here. A Muslim Holocaust is not worth the existance of Israel, and defies the principles on which she was founded. These things take times, and some skirmishes will happen.
Egypt and Jordan got over their prior conflicts with Israel. Relatively speaking, the battles with those countries were worse than what's going on now.

Israel pulled out of Lebanon partly to force Hezbollah to cross Israel's border in order to attack it. Well that's exactly what has happened. That strategy failed. And now it appears Israel is reversing its decision by moving back in to Lebanon to setup a buffer zone. To call this response "disproportionate" ignores history. Was the voluntary withdrawl of Lebanon "disproportionate"? Critics of that plan predicted this result.

[Feanor]

There's no moral authority for nuking anyone in this case. I hope everyone is "joking" here.
...


... am joking about nuking anybody, if that can be considered a joke. (Somebody else "started it", so it's was alright to keep going in that vein, eh?)

Let me state up front that I am not calling for the the destruction of Isreal. It exists and it's not going to go away. Palestinians and Arab states ought to face that fact pragmatically.

On the other hand, taking an historical view, Isreal exists only because of the circumstance of European politics and European imperialism in that part of the world. It is not something that the Arabs of the region wanted or deserved. The principles of the Zionist Movement are completely irrelevant to the aboriginal people who cannot be expected to respect them.

[kexodusc]

... am joking about nuking anybody, if that can be considered a joke. (Somebody else "started it", so it's was alright to keep going in that vein, eh?)

Let me state up front that I am not calling for the the destruction of Isreal. It exists and it's not going to go away. Palestinians and Arab states ought to face that fact pragmatically.

On the other hand, taking an historical view, Isreal exists only because of the circumstance of European politics and European imperialism in that part of the world. It is not something that the Arabs of the region wanted or deserved. The principles of the Zionist Movement are completely irrelevant to the aboriginal people who cannot be expected to respect them.

Nobody will deny that the vast majority of the population of the Middle East was compelled to comply with the creation of Israel for the benefit of tiny minority, behind the backing of Western countries with no vested interest in the region. So yeah, I'm sympathetic to their disagreement with how things were done.

But upon the formation of Israel (the first day in fact) instead of continuing to negotiate or pleading their case, the neighboring countries (all of them) attacked Israel (who at the time were probably the least responsible for the creation of Israel). Counter-attack, after counter-attack has been ongoing since then.

At some point you have to wonder why Israel doesn't try to negotiate a concession based compromised, with meaningful concessions. Surely the land her people were promised didn't include an eternal war against an overwhelming population surrounding her on all sides? But it comes back to history - there's a reason why Israel's national phrase is "Never Again".

[Feanor]

...
Surely the land her people were promised didn't include an eternal war against an overwhelming population surrounding her on all sides?

Well, I'm not so sure that isn't the price to be paid.

Yes, it does come around time and again: the notion that that the land of Isreal is the God-given right of the Jewish people. Certainly you can't seem to keep them out:

Abraham migrated to Palestine from Ur, (where possibly he had pissed someone off);
Times got tough so many moved to Egypt, but ..
They pissed off the Egyptians who tried to enslave, so they moved back to Palestine, kicking out the Philistines, et al.;
The Babylonians conqured and dragged many off to that city, (Babylonian Diaspora), but ...
The Persians beat the Babylonians, and they went back;
They pissed off the Romans who destroyed the Temple, etc.; many left, (Roman Diaspora);
A LONG time passed during which they pissed off a lot of people, culminating with A. Hitler, but ...
The "Final Solution" didn't work so they when back, this timing kicking out the Palestinians;
They are still there, still pissing off a lot of people -- who are saying, "'Never again'?!? How about not this time".I guess it never will end. :(

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

... am joking about nuking anybody, if that can be considered a joke. (Somebody else "started it", it was alright to keep going in that vein, right?)

Let me state up front that I am not calling for the the destruction of Isreal. It exists and it's not going to go away. Palestinians and Arab states ought to face that fact pragmatically.

On the other hand, taking an historical view, Isreal exists only because of the circumstance of European politics and European imperialism in that part of the world. It is not something that the Arabs of the region wanted or deserved. The principiles of the Zionist Movement are completely irrelevant to the aboriginal people who cannot be expected to respect them.

Feanor,
You cannot undo what has already been done. European imperialism has left its damage all over the world. However, I have sympathy for both sides here. Yes Israel was plopped down in the middle of Arab territory. Its done now. However not totally willing to give Israel a pass, I think they have been over aggressive just to maintain a perception of invincibility. I can understand this, because of any of the Arab countries smell weakness from Israel, they will attack it no doubt. What I find troublesome is that many have no problem pointing to the hypocracy of Israel, but how about the hypocracy of the Arab world? It has become very apparent that Hezbollah is using Lebanese citizens are human shields. Why is this not a problem to the world? When Hezbollah fires rockets from civilian neighborhoods, and Israel destroys the launchers killing people, why isn't hezbollah condemned for bring the war into the neighborhoods? Why is the burden of responsibility always on the Israel, or the United States? When the world condemns Israel, doesn't it understand that this emboldens the terrorist?

So here is what we have. We have one country, and one area, both controlled by known terrorist. The authorities, and country leaders cannot ask them to leave or it will destabilize their governments. Isn't anything wrong with this picture? You have the Lebanese PM on television screaming the Israel is destroying his country, but never did he ask hezbollah to leave. You have the Lebanese people crying and screaming on television, but never do they say that hezbollah is the reason they are suffering. I am finding that I am very troubled by this kind of hypocrasy. You have the Palestinian people crying the blues about how they are treated by Israel and how they are suffering at the hands of Israel, and then you have a supposed elected leader for(who by the way died) who's wife lives in the lap of luxury(I understand that Arafat was worth 130 million dollars) off of money donated by the US and Europe, and they don't complain about that.

I think that Israel and the United States is becoming the whipping boy for all of the troubles of the Arab world, and nobody has the insight to look in their own backyard.

Please everyone, no more talk about nuking anyone or everyone envolved in a certain religion. Did anybody desire to kill all white males after the Oklahoma bombing? Throwing the baby out with the bath water doesn't solve anything.

[CookieFactory]

One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

[JoeE SP9]

When Hezbollah or Al Kaida get their hands on some nukes (courtesy of Iran) and drop one on Telaviv and the other on Pittsburgh will moderates still be sitting around trying to negotiate? Radical Islam leaves no room for anything but Islam. You can't negotiate with a group that will kill one of their own countrymen for converting to Christianity.
Moderate Muslims have shown where they stand by providing funding and hiding for militants. Although they say that peaceful co-existence with other religious and ethnic groups is what they want, it's a smoke screen. They want an Islamic world and need to do nothing more than what they've been doing. As long as they supply money and silence the radicals have won.
Many thanks to all the moderates who believe in "negotiation". Consequently the western world is unwilling and unable to fight back. You should understand that radical Muslims will willingly kill anyone who is not a Muslim. If they can ever settle their Jewish problem by killing all of them and giving Israel back to the Palestinians. The USA is next on the list. They are salivating over the very idea. :ihih:

[CookieFactory]

When Hezbollah or Al Kaida get their hands on some nukes (courtesy of Iran) and drop one on Telaviv and the other on Pittsburgh will moderates still be sitting around trying to negotiate? Radical Islam leaves no room for anything but Islam. You can't negotiate with a group that will kill one of their own countrymen for converting to Christianity.
Moderate Muslims have shown where they stand by providing funding and hiding for militants. Although they say that peaceful co-existence with other religious and ethnic groups is what they want, it's a smoke screen. They want an Islamic world and need to do nothing more than what they've been doing. As long as they supply money and silence the radicals have won.
Many thanks to all the moderates who believe in "negotiation". Consequently the western world is unwilling and unable to fight back. You should understand that radical Muslims will willingly kill anyone who is not a Muslim. If they can ever settle their Jewish problem by killing all of them and giving Israel back to the Palestinians. The USA is next on the list. They are salivating over the very idea. :ihih:

If If If...right? Well what "if" the USA brings down it's awesome military might via operation SHOCK and AWE upon the inhabitants of the Middle East? Oh wait there's no need to speculate, that already happened in Afghanistan and Iraq!
Of course both countries are now shining examples of liberty, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness "Spreading Democracy (tm)" is known for right?

[Feanor]

....
Moderate Muslims have shown where they stand by providing funding and hiding for militants. Although they say that peaceful co-existence with other religious and ethnic groups is what they want, it's a smoke screen. They want an Islamic world and need to do nothing more than what they've been doing. As long as they supply money and silence the radicals have won.
...

Joe, now you're sounding like a bigot, plain and simple. Moderate Moslims in Pakistan and Britain helped forstall the planned airline attacks. Moderate Canadian Moslims helped prevent planned attacks in Canada not long before that. It is vital and productive to reach out to moderates throughout the world who are, as yet, still the majority.


....
Many thanks to all the moderates who believe in "negotiation". Consequently the western world is unwilling and unable to fight back. ....

What sort of "fighting back" do you have in mind?? What is being done in Afganistan and especially Iraq hasn't stiffled the extremists. What Israel did in Lebanon was much worse than useless.

[JoeE SP9]

Joe, now you're sounding like a bigot, plain and simple. Moderate Moslims in Pakistan and Britain helped forstall the planned airline attacks. Moderate Canadian Moslims helped prevent planned attacks in Canada not long before that. It is vital and productive to reach out to moderates throughout the world who are, as yet, still the majority.

I am an African American male. I live in the inner city and have neighbors of many colors and creeds. It is impossible to be black and live in the inner city and not have Muslim friends. I even have a few who are members of the NOI (Nation Of Islam). I am not a bigot. I don't care what color or religious beliefs people follow. What I care about is the country I live in and it's safety. I care enough to have voluntarily laid my life on the line for it. It is known that "so-called" Muslim moderates mainly from Iran and Saudi Arabia and its closer neighbors finance much if not all of the radical Islamic terrorists.

When Iran gets its "bomb" project into full production it's no great leap of logic to figure that very soon thereafter one or more Islamic terrorist groups will be suitably equipped with "nukes". Since Iran has declared that the destruction of Israel is something it is actively contributing too do you think those terrorists will not have bombs of their own.


What sort of "fighting back" do you have in mind?? What is being done in Afghanistan and especially Iraq hasn't stiffled the extremists. What Israel did in Lebanon was much worse than useless.

My first recommendation is to increase the bounty on Osama Bin Laden to 10 billion dollars. An increase of the same percentage for other upper echelon terrorists would also be appropriate. With reward money of those amounts tempting someone becomes much easier.

Second we need leadership in this country that will work toward stopping Saudi "moderates" from providing monetary support to terrorists. Opening up our oil reserves and drastically cutting the purchase of Saudi oil would hit those so called "moderates in their pocket. Of course this can only be accomplished if we can hit them where they sit.

No matter what you might think of Islam and the Arabs the fact remains that the objective of Islam is a world of Islam. I don't want to live in that kind of world. I'm sure lots of other Americans are not too happy with the idea of a world ruled by Islam and the Sharia. Living in a world that follows Islamic thought as it's government and uses the Sharia for its legal code is just to repugnant to even think about. No religious freedom of any sort coupled with a legal system straight out of the stone age. Welcome to the year 950AD! I suggest you check how many Christian congregations exist in Saudi Arabia and Iran.

How many of any religions and practicioners of those other than Islam even exist in Saudi Arabia and Iran.

[JoeE SP9]

If If If...right? Well what "if" the USA brings down it's awesome military might via operation SHOCK and AWE upon the inhabitants of the Middle East? Oh wait there's no need to speculate, that already happened in Afghanistan and Iraq!
Of course both countries are now shining examples of liberty, freedom, and the pursuit of happiness "Spreading Democracy (tm)" is known for right?

There are no ifs in my post. It's not a question of if, but of when.:ihih:

[trollgirl]

When Hezbollah or Al Kaida get their hands on some nukes (courtesy of Iran) and drop one on Telaviv and the other on Pittsburgh will moderates still be sitting around trying to negotiate? Radical Islam leaves no room for anything but Islam. You can't negotiate with a group that will kill one of their own countrymen for converting to Christianity.
Moderate Muslims have shown where they stand by providing funding and hiding for militants. Although they say that peaceful co-existence with other religious and ethnic groups is what they want, it's a smoke screen. They want an Islamic world and need to do nothing more than what they've been doing. As long as they supply money and silence the radicals have won.
Many thanks to all the moderates who believe in "negotiation". Consequently the western world is unwilling and unable to fight back. You should understand that radical Muslims will willingly kill anyone who is not a Muslim. If they can ever settle their Jewish problem by killing all of them and giving Israel back to the Palestinians. The USA is next on the list. They are salivating over the very idea. :ihih:

As I have said before, the REAL world is always more complex than propaganda or rhetoric allow. You posit that Islam is totally intolerant, but ignore the historic FACT that in several countries, Christians and (yes) Jews have co-existed with Muslims for centuries. Consider Lebanon, inhabitated for centuries by Christian, Muslim, and Druze. Or Iraq, which until recently, had a healthy Christian minority, even prominent in the Baath Party and the national government. Ironically, it is the West's very war on Islam which has put the final nail in the coffin for Iraqi Christians as a group. Most people in most places prefer to get along in peace, unless they are worked up by some rabble-rouser for reasons of money, power and/or control. Your logic, if taken to the limit, would justify killing every other human being on the planet, just in case they MIGHT be planning to off you.

Laz

[Feanor]

...

Second we need leadership in this country that will work toward stopping Saudi "moderates" from providing monetary support to terrorists. Opening up our oil reserves and drastically cutting the purchase of Saudi oil would hit those so called "moderates in their pocket. Of course this can only be accomplished if we can hit them where they sit.

No matter what you might think of Islam and the Arabs the fact remains that the objective of Islam is a world of Islam. I don't want to live in that kind of world. I'm sure lots of other Americans are not too happy with the idea of a world ruled by Islam and the Sharia. Living in a world that follows Islamic thought as it's government and uses the Sharia for its legal code is just to repugnant to even think about. No religious freedom of any sort coupled with a legal system straight out of the stone age. Welcome to the year 950AD! I suggest you check how many Christian congregations exist in Saudi Arabia and Iran.

...

Moslem extremism is a huge threat to world peace but for that very reason over reaction, and foolishness in general, must be avoided. One point where we definitely agree is that moderate Moslems, especially those living in the West, have done too little to root out extremists in their midst. And being a bit sterner with, e.g., the Saudi royal family might not be a bad thing, unfortunately we would have to tread more carefully than the U.S. State Department is capable of if we weren't to do more harm than good.

Religious Moslems, like religous Christians, feel they're way is right and that it ought to be embrassed by the whole world. But unfortunately hatred as well as religous zeal is playing into the current problem. Some Moslems hate the West for no better reason than that the West has been in ascendancy for a few hundred years. However I believe much of the current hatred has be focused by the specific past and on-going errors of US foreign policy, not the least its uncritical support for the state of Israel and indifference to the historic grievance of the Palestinians. Of course, Iranian Moslems harbor deep resentment towards the US on account its of Shah, an oppressor who would not likely have come to power without US support. Simply put, the US will have to atone for these errors before the Moslem extremist threat can be assuaged.

On the other hand there is essentially zero threat that Western countries are going to have Sharia law or the Wahhabi sect shoved down our throats: it is totally outside our social and religous perspective and it won't happen. Don't worry 'bout it.

[JoeE SP9]

When an Iranian supported terrorist group nukes an Israeli city don't get pi**ed of when I say "I told you so". That time is coming. You can make book on it.:ihih:

[JoeE SP9]

On the other hand there is essentially zero threat that Western countries are going to have Sharia law or the Wahhabi sect shoved down our throats: it is totally outside our social and religous perspective and it won't happen. Don't worry 'bout it.

As I said, the objective of radical Islam and strict Islamic thought is a world of Islam. The radicals are more than willing to kill everyone who doesn't agree with them. They are also quite willing to die for their beliefs. Although you choose not to recognize or admit it, it will eventually be them or us! I have made my choice and I will fight for it. What will you do?:ihih:

[Mr Peabody]

I heard this morning that the United Nations failed to follow through with sanctions against Iran as threatened. That's why these countries can feel free to do as they please. It's also why at some point, whether Isreal, the U.S. or any other country who feels they have justification, has to take action. A well overlooked fact, is that there were several ignored U.N. resolutions with Iraq before the U.S. ever invaded. I'm not saying it was right or there might not have been other motivators, but when you make a resolution or threat of sanction you'd better back it up or just shut up.

[Feanor]

When an Iranian supported terrorist group nukes an Israeli city don't get pi**ed of when I say "I told you so". That time is coming. You can make book on it.:ihih:

Perhaps you're right, but it, again, what's to be done to prevent it. Should Israel or the U.S. strike Iran? I say this is not ethically justifiable, nor would it necessarily be effective.

What the U.S. might do is to declare that it will vaporize the principal city of any nation that first uses nuclear weapons, whether that nation be Iran, Israel, Pakistan, India, or North Korea, and whether the attach is launched by that country or a surrogate. "MAD" has worked in the past; perhaps it's still relevant.

[Feanor]

As I said, the objective of radical Islam and strict Islamic thought is a world of Islam. The radicals are more than willing to kill everyone who doesn't agree with them. They are also quite willing to die for their beliefs. Although you choose not to recognize or admit it, it will eventually be them or us! I have made my choice and I will fight for it. What will you do?:ihih:

I'll be with you. But many things need to come to pass before the choice becomes that simple. Many things might be done to prevent it. In particular, the US needs to rectify its foreign policy starting now.
:idea: