"We've got your back..." - Page 5 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmbdiesel · #61 03-09-2012, 12:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Do you believe it? If so, you have standing with your argument. Otherwise it's just vibrating molecules in a diffuse gas.

Never been one of those boys. Never had it said to me. Never had to believe it.

I am lucky that way, others not so.

so, yeah... vibrating molecules.

LaRondo · #62 03-09-2012, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Find the poll you want. Post it. Show us your stuff. Be as objectively critical of what you post as you are to what I posted, which are from generally well-regarded pollsters.

So far all you offer is vapor. Whatcha got, big boy?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Find the poll you want. Post it. Show us your stuff. Be as objectively critical of what you post as you are to what I posted, which are from generally well-regarded pollsters.

So far all you offer is vapor. Whatcha got, big boy?

I got a straight answer for ya.
You may have polls on hand showing 63% whatever, it still doesn't represent "the general population".
I am sure you will find a majority speaking in favor of support for Israel.
Most likely, because it is what most do. Monkey see monkey do, ain't that right?
Do you think that those "most of them" have ever been to Israel? Anywhere else, maybe? Or do they even have an answer for their answer?

There are some real good quotations coming along.
All you did was quoting "the general population". That's quite a limp-fish response.

Where or how was the obligation assigned to America. In The US Constitution? In The Bible?

Btw, who is 'us'? Are you more than one? Do you feel an increase in strength, assuming you are in the majority?

LaRondo · #63 03-09-2012, 02:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Bovine excrement. Of course we can do something about life: End it. As previously proposed, ethics change with proportion. Or as Josef argued (in opposition to my postulation) regarding similar arguments .... A single death is a tragedy; a million deaths is a statistic.

Nice to see you contradicting yourself. You just made Huskyman's point.

It wasn't about changing ethics, it was about principles.

As for 'bovine excrement', you may regard to 'your' life as such and be stupid enough to end it.

chilcutt · #64 03-09-2012, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Are you saying that the this quote from Wiki about the Hamas Charter is no longer in effect?

The Hamas Charter (or Covenant), issued in 1988, outlined the organization's position on many issues at the time, identifies Hamas as the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine and declares its members to be Muslims who "fear God and raise the banner of Jihad in the face of the oppressors." The charter states "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious" and calls for the eventual creation of an Islamic state in Palestine, in place of Israel and the Palestinian Territories,[40] and the obliteration or dissolution of Israel.[67][68] The Charter also asserts that through shrewd manipulation of imperial countries and secret societies, Zionists were behind a wide range of events and disasters going as far back in history as the French Revolution. Among the charter's controversial statements is the following: "The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews [and kill them]; until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: Oh Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him!”[39] The document also quotes Islamic religious texts to provide justification for fighting against and killing the Jews of Israel,[69] presenting the Arab-Israeli conflict as an inherently irreconcilable struggle between Jews and Muslims, and Judaism and Islam,[39] adding that the only way to engage in this struggle between "truth and falsehood" is through Islam and by means of jihad, until victory or martyrdom.[

Interesting that you would use Hamas as an example of what comprises Palestine.
In actuality, it goes a little bit deeper than that.
While you have pinpointed an article arranged in 1988..A.K.A> 'The Avalon Project'..you have only pointed out what can best be described as "Sensationalising Radical Islamic Views".

Please allow me to give you the flip-side, as well as provide an analysis of the 1988 charter.

> 'The charter makes a point of the ideological differance between Hamas-with its radical Islamic World view, and the Secular-oriented 'The Palestine Liberation Organisation', but pays lip service to the need for Palestinian Unity need to face the Jewish enemy.

It notes that an Islamic World View completly contradicts 'The Palestinian Liberation Organisations' secular orientation and the idea of a secular Palestinian State.

Nevertheless, notes the charter, Hamas is prepared to aid and support every 'Nationalist Trend' working to liberate Palestine and is not interested in creating schisms and disagreements.'

Translated: Trying to compare something from 1988 to present ,is like trying to get on a pogo-stick, and bouncing your way to the moon.

Another translation> your argument/example does not hold water, as it is outdated, and does not reflect the current positions of Hamas/The Muslim Brotherhood/Palestine and its people.

Again I ask you..what action has more of an impact? Someone talking about wiping out Jews..or Isreal actually bombing and killing Palestinian people.

As you say..'Action speaks louder than words'..

Isreal is indiscrimately killing innocent Palestinians..why? Because they are backed by the U.S.

While we are at it, can you explain why it is that Isreal has close to 200 nuclear weapons...that have never been approved..but they are making noise about another country 'Trying to develope' one?

There are Two questions posted to you above...what say you.

MS Fowler · #65 03-09-2012, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chilcutt

Interesting that you would use Hamas as an example of what comprises Palestine.
In actuality, it goes a little bit deeper than that.
While you have pinpointed an article arranged in 1988..A.K.A> 'The Avalon Project'..you have only pointed out what can best be described as "Sensationalising Radical Islamic Views".

Please allow me to give you the flip-side, as well as provide an analysis of the 1988 charter.

> 'The charter makes a point of the ideological differance between Hamas-with its radical Islamic World view, and the Secular-oriented 'The Palestine Liberation Organisation', but pays lip service to the need for Palestinian Unity need to face the Jewish enemy.

It notes that an Islamic World View completly contradicts 'The Palestinian Liberation Organisations' secular orientation and the idea of a secular Palestinian State.

Nevertheless, notes the charter, Hamas is prepared to aid and support every 'Nationalist Trend' working to liberate Palestine and is not interested in creating schisms and disagreements.'

Translated: Trying to compare something from 1988 to present ,is like trying to get on a pogo-stick, and bouncing your way to the moon.

Another translation> your argument/example does not hold water, as it is outdated, and does not reflect the current positions of Hamas/The Muslim Brotherhood/Palestine and its people.

Again I ask you..what action has more of an impact? Someone talking about wiping out Jews..or Isreal actually bombing and killing Palestinian people.

As you say..'Action speaks louder than words'..

Isreal is indiscrimately killing innocent Palestinians..why? Because they are backed by the U.S.

While we are at it, can you explain why it is that Isreal has close to 200 nuclear weapons...that have never been approved..but they are making noise about another country 'Trying to develope' one?

There are Two questions posted to you above...what say you.

I'll grant you that two nations both claiming the same land as their ancestral home is a difficult situation. I see no easy solution.

Who "approves" a nation to have nuclear weapons.?

I see the current Iranian government as among the most irrational of any. I think that is why most of the world is concerned over their having nuclear capability. If any action is to be taken, it must occur before the weapon is developed, as delaying until after the weapon is ready makes it likely that the weapon will be used.
So how much land must Israel give back before they are allowed to live in peace?

chilcutt · #66 03-09-2012, 07:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

I'll grant you that two nations both claiming the same land as their ancestral home is a difficult situation. I see no easy solution.

Who "approves" a nation to have nuclear weapons.?

I see the current Iranian government as among the most irrational of any. I think that is why most of the world is concerned over their having nuclear capability. If any action is to be taken, it must occur before the weapon is developed, as delaying until after the weapon is ready makes it likely that the weapon will be used.
So how much land must Israel give back before they are allowed to live in peace?

That's up to Isreal. Up until now they are disrupting/stalling negotiations.

Botnst · #67 03-09-2012, 07:42 AM

Couldn't answer: There are no unquestionable choices.

Botnst · #68 03-09-2012, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

Nope. No other polls.

But I am not trying validate my position, only trying to repudiate yours...

As for where the actual percentages lie, I imagine your numbers may be closer to the truth than my feelings on the matter, but I am an optimist.
Maybe we see what the next poll shows us.
The tide is beginning to turn, and the American people are getting sick of being involved in every military action.

I believe your last sentence is accurate and I believe there is some recent polling to support it. Probably because the past 10 years or so has served to inform people of the region beyond what they learned in bible school and 5 grade geography. Also we have had a fair amount of population diversification over the past 60 years. It would be very surprising if attitudes did not shift.

But the support is still there and it is pretty overwhelming, which is why elected leadership supports Israel.

HuskyMan · #69 03-09-2012, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

I believe your last sentence is accurate and I believe there is some recent polling to support it. Probably because the past 10 years or so has served to inform people of the region beyond what they learned in bible school and 5 grade geography. Also we have had a fair amount of population diversification over the past 60 years. It would be very surprising if attitudes did not shift.

But the support is still there and it is pretty overwhelming, which is why elected leadership supports Israel.

Elected by who? Jury-rigged, hanging chad, software overridden voting machines like those used in the Florida Bush/Gore debacle? Those voting machines? Remember, it isn't WHO votes that's important, it's who COUNTS the votes that's important.

"In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way."

- Franklin Roosevelt

Support for Israel is one piece of the 'Master Plan'. A plan, by the way, which neither you nor I have any input or power over. The Master Planners are in charge. Get used to being powerless.

Botnst · #70 03-09-2012, 12:38 PM

Ah yes, the vast x-wing conspiracy. I am well protected.

The Clk Man · #71 03-09-2012, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Ah yes, the vast x-wing conspiracy. I am well protected.

Tinfoil Cat ROCKS..

Dudesky · #72 03-09-2012, 12:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HuskyMan

something is up. ask the crew of the USS Liberty none of whom have been recognized for their achievements. Oh, I forgot, that was 43 years ago so it doesn't matter, does it? They want to reserve the right to attack us when they believe it is in their best interest to do so. But, in exchange, we are supposed to place our service men and women in harm's way for their security. a great deal for them, not so much for us.

from the wiki site:

"The evidence was clear. Both Admiral Kidd and I believed with certainty that this attack, which killed 34 American sailors and injured 172 others, was a deliberate effort to sink an American ship and murder its entire crew. Each evening, after hearing testimony all day, we often spoke our private thoughts concerning what we had seen and heard. I recall Admiral Kidd repeatedly referring to the Israeli forces responsible for the attack as 'murderous bastards.' It was our shared belief, based on the documentary evidence and testimony we received first hand, that the Israeli attack was planned and deliberate, and could not possibly have been an accident."

First pass didn't IAF take out all the intel antenna's?
Why would they do that?

HuskyMan · #73 03-09-2012, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Ah yes, the vast x-wing conspiracy. I am well protected.

I recommend consuming large amounts of substances that may relieve the pain of reality. Tune the television to CNN, believe everything that is written in the newspapers and stop thinking for yourself. Life is good.

HuskyMan · #74 03-09-2012, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dudesky

First pass didn't IAF take out all the intel antenna's?
Why would they do that?

Perhaps because they were X-wing conspiracy antennas?

LaRondo · #75 03-09-2012, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

Couldn't answer: There are no unquestionable choices.

Ofcourse, there's not. It's a strictly hypothecial "what if" type of game. That's the beauty of it. No need to get all worked up.

Just ask yourself: 'Where is your heart at?' And the answer (whatever it is) should be crystal.

View Poll Results: If you had to make an unquestionable choice of support, which one would it be:
America	10	62.50%
Israel	6	37.50%
Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll