• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Helen Thomas tells Jews to go back to Germany

Excuse me, Israel gets a pass? on what? they are constantly being condemned by the UN and international community for defending themselfs and being proactive about their security. They are surronded by enemies that want them driven into the Mediterranean.

Ooooh...the UN wrote them an....angry letter.
I wanna see the sanctions start; then maybe I will concede that they don't get a pass.
 
The Old Testament has the reason why the Jews are fighting so hard for their rightful homeland, now. You can dismiss it all you want and claim the Jews have no right to live in Israel, but if you can't backup your argument, say so.

You would find that convenient, wouldn't you?

When the Old Testament is accepted as a factual account of history and a case study for international relations, then you might develop a point. Until then, your comments about the Old Testament are irrelevant to this thread. Hope that clears up your confusion.
 
You would find that convenient, wouldn't you?

When the Old Testament is accepted as a factual account of history and a case study for international relations, then you might develop a point. Until then, your comments about the Old Testament are irrelevant to this thread. Hope that clears up your confusion.

The Dead Sea Scrolls back up a lot of it.
 
The Dead Sea Scrolls back up a lot of it.

That's fine. However, the Dead Sea scrolls do not have a bit of bearing on international law nor do they decide modern national borders. Bicycleman is still irrelevant.
 
That's fine. However, the Dead Sea scrolls do not have a bit of bearing on international law nor do they decide modern national borders. Bicycleman is still irrelevant.

History is always relevant.
 
The Old Testament has the reason why the Jews are fighting so hard for their rightful homeland, now. You can dismiss it all you want and claim the Jews have no right to live in Israel, but if you can't backup your argument, say so.

Just because their ancestors or in this case their ancient ancestors lived there does not mean they have a right to live there just because their ancient ancestors did. I do accept the Bible as a factual history book ,however historical claims don't mean anything and have no relevance on today. It would be like giving the descendants of slaves reparations, the government taking your property and giving it someone who claims to be descendant of a tribe that once lived in that area or taking chunks of Africa and giving it to people who claim to be decadents of the people who once lived their and I am pretty sure that you do not support those things. The only thing that gives Israelis the right to be there is because of spoils of war. The Ottomans lost in WWI so the allies were free to do what ever they want with their chunks.
 
Last edited:
Ooooh...the UN wrote them an....angry letter.

jallman,

The international pressure that is frequently placed on Israel is no small thing. Charles Krauthammer makes a compelling argument in support of this:

washingtonpost.com

...

But even more important, why did Israel even have to resort to blockade? Because, blockade is Israel's fallback as the world systematically de-legitimizes its traditional ways of defending itself -- forward and active defense.

(1) Forward defense: As a small, densely populated country surrounded by hostile states, Israel had, for its first half-century, adopted forward defense -- fighting wars on enemy territory (such as the Sinai and Golan Heights) rather than its own.

Where possible (Sinai, for example) Israel has traded territory for peace. But where peace offers were refused, Israel retained the territory as a protective buffer zone. Thus Israel retained a small strip of southern Lebanon to protect the villages of northern Israel. And it took many losses in Gaza, rather than expose Israeli border towns to Palestinian terror attacks. It is for the same reason America wages a grinding war in Afghanistan: You fight them there, so you don't have to fight them here.

But under overwhelming outside pressure, Israel gave it up. The Israelis were told the occupations were not just illegal but at the root of the anti-Israel insurgencies -- and therefore withdrawal, by removing the cause, would bring peace.

Land for peace. Remember? Well, during the past decade, Israel gave the land -- evacuating South Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005. What did it get? An intensification of belligerency, heavy militarization of the enemy side, multiple kidnappings, cross-border attacks and, from Gaza, years of unrelenting rocket attack.

(2) Active defense: Israel then had to switch to active defense -- military action to disrupt, dismantle and defeat (to borrow President Obama's description of our campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaeda) the newly armed terrorist mini-states established in southern Lebanon and Gaza after Israel withdrew.

The result? The Lebanon war of 2006 and Gaza operation of 2008-09. They were met with yet another avalanche of opprobrium and calumny by the same international community that had demanded the land-for-peace Israeli withdrawals in the first place. Worse, the U.N. Goldstone report, which essentially criminalized Israel's defensive operation in Gaza while whitewashing the casus belli -- the preceding and unprovoked Hamas rocket war -- effectively de-legitimized any active Israeli defense against its self-declared terror enemies.

(3) Passive defense: Without forward or active defense, Israel is left with but the most passive and benign of all defenses -- a blockade to simply prevent enemy rearmament. Yet, as we speak, this too is headed for international de-legitimation. Even the United States is now moving toward having it abolished.

Essentially, the frequent international condemnation directed at Israel has forced them to abandon two of their previous defense strategies.

[quoteI wanna see the sanctions start; then maybe I will concede that they don't get a pass.[/QUOTE]

Why do you think Israel is deserving of sanctions?
 
If you can find me some way other than religious bias for the Old Testament to matter in the Israel/Palestine question, by all means, do so.

I am just saying that the dead sea scrolls are a study of the "history" of ancient religions. It provides a great insight of the way people conducted their religions in ancient times such as "bread and wine" and what the" Messiah" meant to them. I am not claiming that they are right or wrong.

Educational Site: Dead Sea Scrolls
 
Ooooh...the UN wrote them an....angry letter.
I wanna see the sanctions start; then maybe I will concede that they don't get a pass.

I wanna see sanctions start on the U.S., since according to you we did whatever Israel did too (I refer you to your response to Tasha, claiming that we "did it too").

EDIT: And even ignoring that, how would the lack of sanctions be a "pass" if we're failing to get sanctions on even Iran and North Korea? That doesn't make any sense.
 
Last edited:
I wanna see sanctions start on the U.S., since according to you we did whatever Israel did too (I refer you to your response to Tasha, claiming that we "did it too").

You can refer me to it till you choke on the reference but that doesn't make them in any way similar.

EDIT: And even ignoring that, how would the lack of sanctions be a "pass" if we're failing to get sanctions on even Iran and North Korea? That doesn't make any sense.

In order for that to be a rational argument or the slightest bit relevant, you would have to assume that I don't want sanctions on Iraq or North Korea. Care to take a guess as to what my stance is on those two after you pull your foot out of your mouth?
 
You can refer me to it till you choke on the reference but that doesn't make them in any way similar.

Then maybe you should have said that instead of "you're defending murderers by saying that other people did it too".

In order for that to be a rational argument or the slightest bit relevant, you would have to assume that I don't want sanctions on Iraq or North Korea. Care to take a guess as to what my stance is on those two after you pull your foot out of your mouth?

I said "even". As in, those are the ONLY countries anyone is seeking sanctions for, even though we can't get them. In order for YOUR argument to be rational, Israel would have to be worse at human rights violations than every single country except Iran and North Korea.

Eh, dunno why I bother. This is one topic where you seem determined to throw reason aside to troll the hell out of anyone involved. I'll get back to you when you present actual arguments instead of one-line flame bait.
 
Then maybe you should have said that instead of "you're defending murderers by saying that other people did it too".

I never defended murderers by saying "other people did it, too". Tashah, however, did. I think you need to brush up on your comprehension skills before you come at me again, boy.

I said "even". As in, those are the ONLY countries anyone is seeking sanctions for, even though we can't get them. In order for YOUR argument to be rational, Israel would have to be worse at human rights violations than every single country except Iran and North Korea.

Uh, no. We weren't talking about North Korea and Iran at that moment. My position is logically consistent because I want sanctions against them all, along with a few others. Try again. You haven't done well so far.

Eh, dunno why I bother. This is one topic where you seem determined to throw reason aside to troll the hell out of anyone involved. I'll get back to you when you present actual arguments instead of one-line flame bait.[/

Hey, kid...you interjected here. You inserted yourself into the discussion. There was no trolling going on here. In fact, that's just your sour label given to an opponent who doesn't allow you to create irrelevant sidebars. "Waaaaaa, he trolled me because he won't capitulate to having the discussion *I* want to have. Waaaaaaaa".

When you bring something on topic to discuss, then we can have a discussion. Otherwise, get a tissue and dry your nose.
 
I never defended murderers by saying "other people did it, too".

I never said that you did. I don't think I'm the one who needs to brush up on my reading comprehension.

Uh, no. We weren't talking about North Korea and Iran at that moment. My position is logically consistent because I want sanctions against them all, along with a few others. Try again. You haven't done well so far.

See... this is what you do. You attack the argument in whatever way first pops to your head without bothering to be consistent or follow the actual conversation. Who you want sanctions on is irrelevant to what YOU were saying, which is that sanctions on Israel would be necessary for OTHERS to be consistent. Yet since most other people are right now only seeking sanctions on Iran and North Korea, that would mean that by the standards you are using, Israel is as bad as Iran and North Korea and basicaly nobody else.

And I will instert anything relevant to the discussion into the discussion, and here your trolling is relevant. If you aren't consciously trolling, then this issue must make you really angry for some reason, enough to completely overtake your rationality. If so, I'd suggest taking the advice in your sig.
 
I never said that you did. I don't think I'm the one who needs to brush up on my reading comprehension.

It seems to me you are when you are comparing the two responses or whatever it is you think you are doing.

See... this is what you do.

If you don't like it, stop responding. :shrug:

As for the rest of your dissertation on the poster rather than the posts, I went ahead and reported it in hopes someone helps you before you hurt yourself.
 
Last edited:
Moderator's Warning:
Enough with the personal attacks.
 
I never said that you did. I don't think I'm the one who needs to brush up on my reading comprehension.



See... this is what you do. You attack the argument in whatever way first pops to your head without bothering to be consistent or follow the actual conversation. Who you want sanctions on is irrelevant to what YOU were saying, which is that sanctions on Israel would be necessary for OTHERS to be consistent. Yet since most other people are right now only seeking sanctions on Iran and North Korea, that would mean that by the standards you are using, Israel is as bad as Iran and North Korea and basicaly nobody else.

And I will instert anything relevant to the discussion into the discussion, and here your trolling is relevant. If you aren't consciously trolling, then this issue must make you really angry for some reason, enough to completely overtake your rationality. If so, I'd suggest taking the advice in your sig.

Oooooooo, burn.:flames:
 
On a pedestal? For being a DP avatar? That's the only place I know her from. She must be before my time.
For quite a while she's been referred to as "The Dean of the White House press corp". The fact that you didn't know that has no significance.
 
Well then, maybe they should move their "homeland" to somewhere safer.
Such as... any place else in the entire world.
whatever you say Helen
 
It seems to me you are when you are comparing the two responses or whatever it is you think you are doing.



If you don't like it, stop responding. :shrug:

As for the rest of your dissertation on the poster rather than the posts, I went ahead and reported it in hopes someone helps you before you hurt yourself.



So, that's why other posters never come back after arguing with you?
 
Last edited:
It irritates me to no end on how much people give a rats ass about any of this. Its been going on since jews and muslims existed. I dont care for either side but if I was going to pick it would be the ones that get attacked constantly because they won land. That would be israel. :roll:
 
Well then, maybe they should move their "homeland" to somewhere safer.
Such as... any place else in the entire world.

Well, ya know, they did one time before and 6 million of them were murdered for their trouble. By comparison, they are in a safer place.
 
I think the lesson from all this would be, don't wait too long to retire. Bow out while you're still in good shape. Don't wait until you're too old to keep yourself from making a total fool of yourself.

Part of living a life of grace and style is knowing when to let go...
 
[/B]

So, that's why other posters never come back after arguing with you?

What are you talking about? Are we still butthurt that I wouldn't indulge your conversation about the Old Testament.
 
Back
Top Bottom