To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 17402
17401  |  17403
Subject: 
Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Fri, 9 Aug 2002 09:04:01 GMT
Viewed: 
646 times
  
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:

Hamas, for instance, has publically declared their desire to not end their
fight until Israel is no longer.  Peace is dangerous when one side's idea of
it is the elimination of the other side.

There are those in Israel who want to do the same to the Palestinians. You
are using the views of extremists to condemn a whole nation.

Wanting and doing are two very different things.  Besides, I have tried to make
distinctions between Palestinian extremists and the GP all the time.  It is my
criticism of them that *they* aren't making that distinction more.

In the post you responded to I cited two articles. You chose to criticise
the one backing dialogue and mutual respect. This is despite the unpalatable
nature of the second text:

"I am sure that Jews kill Arabs only for self-defence and justice, but Arabs
do it because they like to kill."

"The Arab has the instinct of murder and killing like all gentiles, and only
Jews do not have that instinct - that is a genetic fact."

So why label peace as "dangerous" and let racism off the hook? Do you not
view the comments in the second text as "dangerous" also?

Those views are wacky as well, but I reject your attempt to establish some sort
of moral equivalency here.  Murdering civilians the way Palestinian terrorists
do is WAY wrong-- it doesn't matter what their grievances are-- it is *never*
justified.  They become instantly as guilty as those who oppress them.  Do you
agree?

For the most part, the IDF violence upon the Palestinians is in retaliation for
terrorist attacks.  They *have* to respond lest they embolden the terrorists.
That is a simple fact.  I know you don't agree, and I'm not willing to debate
it.  The *worst* thing one can do in response to terrorism is to do nothing--
it is like a big green light to these people.  There is no "cycle of violence".
Even if Israel stopped responding in force to terrorist attacks, they would
continue.

-John



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
 
(...) Are you saying Israeli extremists do not murder Palestinians out of pure hate? Are you saying Israeli extremists did not wreck Oslo and Oslo II? (...) I agree they are oppressed. I agree murdering civilians is wrong. I reject the notion that (...) (22 years ago, 13-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
 
(...) There are those in Israel who want to do the same to the Palestinians. You are using the views of extremists to condemn a whole nation. In the post you responded to I cited two articles. You chose to criticise the one backing dialogue and (...) (22 years ago, 9-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

44 Messages in This Thread:














Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR