 | | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
|
|
(...) I was making a distinction of intent. The IDF does not *target* the civilian population as Hamas does. Yes, innocents are killed, but not intentionally. I find the distinction crucial. But if you want to make comparisons, answer this: why do (...) (22 years ago, 16-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
|
|
(...) What do you mean? Isn't that the goal? The only goal? Isn't saving lives the whole reason for concern? I hope it's not just about retribution for you. (...) This can only be said if you extend the timeframe infinitely. It's like saying there (...) (22 years ago, 16-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
|
|
(...) My point is that *any* amount of terrorism is unacceptable. So the fact that the number of homicide bombers reduces from say 10 a month to 2 a month is irrelevant-- *any* amount is too many. (...) What I am trying to point out is that as long (...) (22 years ago, 16-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
|
|
(...) But you're also saying, in essence, that two is just as bad as ten. And that's simply not so. Two is a big improvement over ten. And it's reasonable to think that maybe whatever tactics can move the number from ten to two might also move it (...) (22 years ago, 16-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
|
|
(...) In the past it has deliberately targeted non-combatants. Now it acts with (at least) complete disregard for civilian losses. (...) I'm sure some Israelis are happy - don't doubt that. I'm sure not all Palestinians celebrate – don’t deny that. (...) (22 years ago, 19-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
|
|
(...) Or should you, for instance, carry a burden of guild because your great-great-great-gr...eat-great- great-great-great-gr...eat-great- great-great-great-gr...eat-great- great-great-great-gr...eat-great- great-great-great-gr...eat-great- (...) (22 years ago, 19-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
|
|
(...) One man's terrorist is an other man's partisan. Marek Edelman was one of the leaders of the Warsaw ghetto uprising of the Jews against the Nazis in 1943. Is he a terrorist or a freedom fighter? Should his living relatives be punished for his (...) (22 years ago, 22-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
|
|
(...) Irrelevant. I reject your comparison of Nazi Germany's occupation and Israel's, and am rather offended by it. -John (22 years ago, 24-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: "Peace" can be dangerous (was: Re: Peruvian Indians [Re: ..)
|
|
(...) lol. I thought you'd say that. I think it is relevant. (...) I thought you'd say that too. But the truth is Mr Edelman probably knows more ablout the subject than either you or I. This is what I read about him a few days ago in the Guardian: (...) (22 years ago, 2-Sep-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
