Im So Happy

[zubin]

lets first than discuss what morality is

Yeah, if moral inferiority is a characteristic of terrorism, then we should discuss morality because it may be more clear of a concept than terrorism. That's my only point and we agree again. Perhaps we might have different conceptions of morality that causes us to have different views on the Hamas-Israel comparison. We'll talk about this on a seperate thread as you suggested, unless anyone wants to compare the morality of Israel and Hamas here.

But up until here... your admission that terrorists must be morally inferior I think at least shows that it is not a dichotomous black/white issue. Whether you call Hamas a terrorist or not, moral criteria would not suggest that Israel is a saint and Hamas the devil. It may be a complex or moderate difference and I think this invalidates the black/white concept of terrorist once again...

ramin you ask terrorist i thoght and still do think that you are asking what terrorist is

and we have been down that line many times and by the away i appreciated it alot becuase now it has enabled me to not only choose words carefully but i am now alot more articulete.

For analyzing truth, reality and politics....Word analysis might be the biggest asset to have these days... Kudos to you Mike, hats off.

[donsaeid]

they dont get anytime on the news becuase they cant do anything
they israeli government cracks down on theme which i am very glade.

anyways the world is seeing that israel is a country that once peace and i am very glade that they have now passed the ball of peace in the palactinian hand
these are examples of passing the ball
held on to seiesfire despite rocket attacks that keep coming one even hitting a nursery
despite shooting of civillians in the westbank
releasing of 100 million doller in palastinian taxas
and more importantlity that i couldnt belive which i dont like but whatever for peace you have to pay ,and that is release of 150 palastinian prisinores with out the release of gilad shalit.

hopefully the palastinians will fallowe throgh
and pass the ball back.

First let us see this promisses being delivered!

Secondly what does 150 helps when 15000 (not right number) are in jail!

but that is a start! i hope that continues!

there goes a shot at peac down the F&*ing drain

F&%$ing terrorists
hamas once a again derail the peac process

it will take alot for israel not to hit back

just when they were about to
dismantel 27 checkpoints
and other stuff
ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhh

Always somebody wants to destroy something good! i hope Israel doesnt respons as they did against Lebanon!

Yeah, if moral inferiority is a characteristic of terrorism, then we should discuss morality because it may be more clear of a concept than terrorism. That's my only point and we agree again. Perhaps we might have different conceptions of morality that causes us to have different views on the Hamas-Israel comparison. We'll talk about this on a seperate thread as you suggested, unless anyone wants to compare the morality of Israel and Hamas here.

But up until here... your admission that terrorists must be morally inferior I think at least shows that it is not a dichotomous black/white issue. Whether you call Hamas a terrorist or not, moral criteria would not suggest that Israel is a saint and Hamas the devil. It may be a complex or moderate difference and I think this invalidates the black/white concept of terrorist once again...



For analyzing truth, reality and politics....Word analysis might be the biggest asset to have these days... Kudos to you Mike, hats off.

hmmm

[mike435]

Yeah, if moral inferiority is a characteristic of terrorism, then we should discuss morality because it may be more clear of a concept than terrorism. That's my only point and we agree again. Perhaps we might have different conceptions of morality that causes us to have different views on the Hamas-Israel comparison. We'll talk about this on a seperate thread as you suggested, unless anyone wants to compare the morality of Israel and Hamas here.

But up until here... your admission that terrorists must be morally inferior I think at least shows that it is not a dichotomous black/white issue. Whether you call Hamas a terrorist or not, moral criteria would not suggest that Israel is a saint and Hamas the devil. It may be a complex or moderate difference and I think this invalidates the black/white concept of terrorist once again...



For analyzing truth, reality and politics....Word analysis might be the biggest asset to have these days... Kudos to you Mike, hats off.

i did not claim israel is a saint
you dont have to be a saint to not be a terrorist
you also dont have to be evil to be a terrorist

even thogh a terrorist or a non terrorist can have these things or not have them.

[zubin]

i did not claim israel is a saint
you dont have to be a saint to not be a terrorist
you also dont have to be evil to be a terrorist

even thogh a terrorist or a non terrorist can have these things or not have them.

Since we're labelling one of them very negatively, the lack of a label on the other implies that there is a dichotomy where one is evil and the other not evil.

So if we're calling Hamas a terrorist, then what should we call Israel? Should we call Israel a former terrorist, half-terrorist, full terrorist? I'm guessing that you're happy with 'occupyier'?

[mike435]

Since we're labelling one of them very negatively, the lack of a label on the other implies that there is a dichotomy where one is evil and the other not evil.

So if we're calling Hamas a terrorist, then what should we call Israel? Should we call Israel a former terrorist, half-terrorist, full terrorist? I'm guessing that you're happy with 'occupyier'?

israel is all of those and more
no dought

that is why when you use or talke about israel
you will say israel is and enter in proper adjective that apllies.

[zubin]

israel is all of those and more
no dought

that is why when you use or talke about israel
you will say israel is and enter in proper adjective that apllies.

So I guess your main argument is that Israel should not talk to Hamas, not because they are terrorist or morally inferior (as you say Israel is these things too), but because it would mean potentially bargaining away the very last bargaining chip and right that Jews have, their homeland? My question is that is that really true. Does talking with Hamas really mean bargaining away a viable and strong Jewish homeland? To me it means the willingness to compromise that homeland in a more fair way than currently exists, but not necessarily jeapordizing a majority of it.... Israel to me is clearly strong enough to defend itself if it wants to, and they would be more justified to do so also if they compromised. Also- and here is a point of controversy perhaps (though I do not think it should be controversial or would be if it werent for neo-cons and extremists in Israel)... I think they would have less opposition if they compromised. It is more satisfying that an enemy has compromised and more infuriorating if an enemy continues to be unrelentingly unfair... especially for Muslims who care for justice so much. Plus, the only strong opposition to Israel is Palestinians. If Palestinians are satisfied with the compromise, then the conflict is over right away.

[mike435]

So I guess your main argument is that Israel should not talk to Hamas, not because they are terrorist or morally inferior (as you say Israel is these things too), but because it would mean potentially bargaining away the very last bargaining chip and right that Jews have, their homeland? My question is that is that really true. Does talking with Hamas really mean bargaining away a viable and strong Jewish homeland? To me it means the willingness to compromise that homeland in a more fair way than currently exists, but not necessarily jeapordizing a majority of it.... Israel to me is clearly strong enough to defend itself if it wants to, and they would be more justified to do so also if they compromised. Also- and here is a point of controversy perhaps (though I do not think it should be controversial or would be if it werent for neo-cons and extremists in Israel)... I think they would have less opposition if they compromised. It is more satisfying that an enemy has compromised and more infuriorating if an enemy continues to be unrelentingly unfair... especially for Muslims who care for justice so much. Plus, the only strong opposition to Israel is Palestinians. If Palestinians are satisfied with the compromise, then the conflict is over right away.

hubin i dont think israel shouldnt speak to hamas because it will be playing with its barganing chip but because hamas is a terrorist

the points you make about comparmose are very true
but the sad thing is most palastinians dont think like you were they say ok i got somthing now let me do somthing because of various factors from betrail by both their own people and worldcommunity, relligious, culture etc

and more importantly israelis dont was to comparmise because have no trust of the palastinan especialy in the face of hamas retric that wants to see israel destroyed and does not except a 2 state solution,
this is more of a reason why israel should not negoriate with hamas because hamas in reality is still a just a terrorist group it is not a credibale government body having things at stake.
the PA on the other hans is much better because at least it has regognition and resposiblity not only to the palastinians but to the world community somthing that HAMAS a terrorist orginization does not have.
more reasons why israelis dont want to compermise yet becuase they see theri other dealing with the palastinians in the past

[zubin]

hubin i dont think israel shouldnt speak to hamas because it will be playing with its barganing chip but because hamas is a terrorist

the points you make about comparmose are very true
but the sad thing is most palastinians dont think like you were they say ok i got somthing now let me do somthing because of various factors from betrail by both their own people and worldcommunity, relligious, culture etc

and more importantly israelis dont was to comparmise because have no trust of the palastinan especialy in the face of hamas retric that wants to see israel destroyed and does not except a 2 state solution,
this is more of a reason why israel should not negoriate with hamas because hamas in reality is still a just a terrorist group it is not a credibale government body having things at stake.
the PA on the other hans is much better because at least it has regognition and resposiblity not only to the palastinians but to the world community somthing that HAMAS a terrorist orginization does not have.
more reasons why israelis dont want to compermise yet becuase they see theri other dealing with the palastinians in the past

I thought you just said Israel is also a terrorist group... also, how do you know Hamas would not recognize Israel if they are engaged and there is compromise? This has never been tested!

[mike435]

I thought you just said Israel is also a terrorist group... also, how do you know Hamas would not recognize Israel if they are engaged and there is compromise? This has never been tested!

jubin with sonthing this important this vidal you dont test things out you dont test theorys out especialy if your enemy is idiologlcy is bent on seeing your destruction and death .

[zubin]

why not? why not test the theory that Hamas will recognize Israel if Israel compromises and is more fair? What's the worst that can happen?

Needless to say that talks come with conditions and limits. But even this is rejected, no?

[golgol85]

lets see what can be infered here: mike i still dont follow whether you are calling Israel a terrorist or not. At first you say Israel is a terrorist, then you say it isnt. If we are going to look at this matter objectively, we need to realize that both sides are at fault, we wont go into how much at fault because that takes away from objectivity. How you ask? Well, the Israelis think the Palestinians are more at fault while the Palestinians think the Israelis are to blame. In order to not waste time with who is more at fault, the best solution is to look at the issue of fault as black and white (either a country is or is not at fault). I feel both countries are at fault.

The concept of terrorism, i think we have beaten it to death guys in other threads. Both groups are terrorists, based on the definition of a terrorist. I wonder if Israel did anything to provoke Hamas that we arent hearing about in the news? I am sure there is more than meets the eye.

Why is it that it only seems that the Palestinians are "bent on seeing the destruction and death" of Israel? Do you mean to tell me mike that Israel doesnt want the same for the Palestinians? I think they are both culpable, both are in the wrong, but remember that Israel has the upper hand in that it has stronger millitary, it has killed many more Palestinians. Dont expect Hamas or Palestinians to love Israel with what they have seen. Israel needs to prove it doesnt have any hidden agendas. Once the Palestinians feel trusting of Israel, then and only then will relations between the two improve.

The most important question is how to gain Palestine's trust. The most important move would be sticking to the cease fire. That is a great first step. We need to remember trust is a two way street, but with the massive destruction Israel has brought upong Palestine and Lebanon, dont expect Palestine to be trusting immediately. Israel needs to prove itself.

[mike435]

lets see what can be infered here: mike i still dont follow whether you are calling Israel a terrorist or not. At first you say Israel is a terrorist, then you say it isnt. If we are going to look at this matter objectively, we need to realize that both sides are at fault, we wont go into how much at fault because that takes away from objectivity. How you ask? Well, the Israelis think the Palestinians are more at fault while the Palestinians think the Israelis are to blame. In order to not waste time with who is more at fault, the best solution is to look at the issue of fault as black and white (either a country is or is not at fault). I feel both countries are at fault.

The concept of terrorism, i think we have beaten it to death guys in other threads. Both groups are terrorists, based on the definition of a terrorist. I wonder if Israel did anything to provoke Hamas that we arent hearing about in the news? I am sure there is more than meets the eye.

Why is it that it only seems that the Palestinians are "bent on seeing the destruction and death" of Israel? Do you mean to tell me mike that Israel doesnt want the same for the Palestinians? I think they are both culpable, both are in the wrong, but remember that Israel has the upper hand in that it has stronger millitary, it has killed many more Palestinians. Dont expect Hamas or Palestinians to love Israel with what they have seen. Israel needs to prove it doesnt have any hidden agendas. Once the Palestinians feel trusting of Israel, then and only then will relations between the two improve.

The most important question is how to gain Palestine's trust. The most important move would be sticking to the cease fire. That is a great first step. We need to remember trust is a two way street, but with the massive destruction Israel has brought upong Palestine and Lebanon, dont expect Palestine to be trusting immediately. Israel needs to prove itself.

israel needs to prove itself?
staying silent while rockets after rockets hit the country
in the face of repeated violation of ceasfire expanding policy of and moving forwared with peac

[golgol85]

Israel is not so innocent and has gotten a bad rap for being the first to jump to using force. Because of this, Israel needs to cool its trigger happy nature and then maybe the middle eastern countries that are in conflict with Israel will trust enough to feel safe. If they trust, behet ghol midam all the bloodshed will end.

[mike435]

Israel is not so innocent and has gotten a bad rap for being the first to jump to using force. Because of this, Israel needs to cool its trigger happy nature and then maybe the middle eastern countries that are in conflict with Israel will trust enough to feel safe. If they trust, behet ghol midam all the bloodshed will end.

come one gogl gol please i do agree that israel is trigger happy but its not the first that jumps on the gun first

[donsaeid]

Trigger happy?

anyway! any news from talks between israelis and palestinians? all saddam shit has made this topic out of news!