 | | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) a (...) in (...) Neither am I. I don't think the Terrorism Research Centre intend it to be either. As I said, I don't think there is a single "workable" definition of terrorism. (...) However most military action is directed at military (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
In lugn (...) the Bill of Rights (...) What??? You mean, that since we DON'T WANT your Bill of Rights, or your Declaration of Independance (we did it nicely enough ourselves, thank you without any guns from you prodding us :) (1812 :) - Canada is a (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Israel and Palestine
|
|
(...) Do you think this would really be practical? Do we unwind all the way back to the first settlers? How do we deal with the wealth which has been generated from those lands? I'm curious as to how and where we draw the line. Perhaps it is prudent (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) Hmm, I'm not sure this is a workable definition. I think this is the general purpose of most military action (just about no military action expects to eliminate much more than a fraction of the enemy forces, what it seeks to do is eliminate (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
(...) While I don't have any knowledge of the laws of Canada and the UK, I'm pretty confident the rights enshrined in the US Constitution are not as well protected in Canada and the UK. (...) The right to bear arms is not the "almost single one (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) My view, after reading your link and a few other things, is that I cannot see any situation where a mass-destruction device such as those used over Japan would be the most effective weapon. Well, OK, maybe if there was a (very) large area (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: More on Palestine
|
|
(...) and a (...) and time (...) out at (...) minimizing the (...) applied (...) WTC as (...) Thanks, Tom. I agree that there's no single "catch-all" definition of terrorism. There's a bit of a discussion about it here (URL) quote from there: "The (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Israel and Palestine
|
|
(...) Would it be possible for ownership to be *purchased* from legitimate previous owners rather than having had to have been in the family all that time? Or are you saying that purchasing land can't be done, only inheritance is acceptable as a (...) (23 years ago, 9-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Violence created by presence of guns? (was: Gotta love Oracle...)
|
|
(...) And what about *inside* them? Are these three nations that homogeneous? (...) OTOH, it can be said the US are too far to the Conservative side... it depends of the reference you take for "Centre". (...) Yes, but the UK did not need a (...) (23 years ago, 9-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Israel and Palestine
|
|
(...) Absolutely, and there are Arab Jews with such deeds that Israel also will not recognize. It's not a question of religion, it's basically racism. Arab Jews are second class Jews in Israel because the Zionists regard Palestinians as transients. (...) (23 years ago, 9-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
