Amalek

mikkyo · Apr 25, 2008

GerTzedek said:
Context, context. You are quoting and purporting it to mean something he clearly stated he did NOT believe. This is slander, and it is immoral. It also violates the rules of the forum.

Again, post 132 in its entirety:

Ok, let the moderators decide.

CaDan · Apr 25, 2008

Secundulus said:
Unfortunately, it is not true. History is replete with examples to the contrary. I will mention a few.

Gaul never again threatened Rome.

It is arguable that the Celts (Gauls) ended up actually taking over the Roman Empire in the West--they just didn't call themselves Celts anymore once they assimilated.

Secundulus said:
The Scots are peaceful members of the UK.

Due to unique dynastic weirdness creating the United Kingdom.

Secundulus said:
The Apache no longer raid settlements.

To a large extent, both the Apache and Navajo wars were "won" because the United States government let the defeated "up easy."

Secundulus said:
Japan has become pacifistic.

Japan was a nation state that engaged in industrial war and lost. Not really applicable here.
--
You quoted von Clausewitz earlier in either this thread or the other one, but I think you may misinterpret him. We must not make war merely to make war or to preserve honor. We must only make war in order to accomplish policy. The desire to kill, the desire for vengeance, cannot drive our policy. Our policy must sometimes make use of violence (for we live in a fallen world), but violence must not be the goal itself.

uberd00b · Apr 25, 2008

editing, quotes are borked.

CaDan · Apr 25, 2008

Secundulus said:
Yes. It is here in a speech two weeks ago by a Palestinian Member of Parliament. http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1739.htm

Back to civics class.

A statement by a member of the Legislature is not a declaration of war by a government. If I combed through the Congressional Record, I could probably show the United States is at war with every nation on earth.

CaDan · Apr 25, 2008

GerTzedek said:
And where are the Amalekites now?

Long dead. But the Midianites and the Edomites and the Philistines and the Babylonians and the Medes and the Persians and the Greeks and the Romans were around after them.

Jerusalem fell. The temple was razed. The ark was taken.

GeratTzedek · Apr 25, 2008

Exactyly. the Amalekites, the only group Israel was ordered to completely anhilate down to the last child, is no more. Other enemies existed, but they were not terrorist cultures.

The destruction of the Temple was allowed by G-d due to behavior of Jews. On both occasions.

The ark is not missing. It has not yet been restored to the Temple because, obviously, the Third Temple has yet to be built.

GeratTzedek · Apr 25, 2008

Japan was a nation state that engaged in industrial war and lost. Not really applicable here.
--

What do you mean by "industrial war"??? Economics? You mean all those stories about kamakazis are made up?

mikkyo · Apr 25, 2008

Secundulus said:
Unfortunately, it is not true. History is replete with examples to the contrary. I will mention a few.

Gaul never again threatened Rome.
The Scots are peaceful members of the UK.
The Apache no longer raid settlements.
Japan has become pacifistic.

Do you want more? This cycle of violence statement is nonsense useful only to those countries without the will to act decisively.

And both Muslims and Christians had their crusades, but it was finished a long time ago. You just don't understand how the world works these days. Media and internet also play a role in perpetuating the animosities between Christians, Jews, and Muslims. The rate we are going, everyone will blindly side with their religion not understanding the differences between right and wrong. Now we have more jihadists and even sympathizers. But we also have an increase in anti-Islam and even Christians like you who are under the same delusions as Muslims who claim this is a holy war. You see, because of a handful of terrorists, it has now blown into bigger proportions.

Why do you think Bin Laden attacked before Ramadam. Because he knew America had to maintain it's sense of power and attack quickly. And America did attack knowing that Muslims revere Ramadan as a holy month. Bin Laden is a propagandist. He knew there were extremists. He knew there were devout Muslims. He even knew there were sympathizers. He calculated everything to ensure these groups will increase their sentiments two-fold if there is "a war on Islam".

America should have never attacked. They should have waited and pretend to be weak while gathering concrete intelligence. Then they can get them when they are most vulnerable, not when they know you are coming to get them.

Look America cannot even protect it's borders from illegal aliens. So then how do you expect them to eliminate terrorism in the world? America should have first ensured domestic security, and then wait. Why do you think terrorists have not attacked the US yet. They are simply waiting just like Bin Laden after the first world trade attack. They are waiting for America's next vulnerable moment. In order to get them you have to play their same game.

GeratTzedek · Apr 25, 2008

mikkyo said:
Ok fine, let me ask you this. Do you really think we can eliminate terrorism in the world? Does tit for tat really work with Old Testament laws and Islamic ideologies?

Do you think you can eliminate murder, theft, child molestation? Yet the fact it cannot be entirely irradicated is no excuse for letting it run rampant and excusing it.

CaDan · Apr 25, 2008

GerTzedek said:
Exactyly. the Amalekites, the only group Israel was ordered to completely anhilate down to the last child, is no more. Other enemies existed, but they were not terrorist cultures.

1. I am not a literalist. I frankly have no idea whether or not every single Amalekite was killed.

2. Other cultures did nasty things, too. They were also a threat.

3. The threat did not go away. War after war after war. Even after killing all the Amalekites.

GerTzedek said:
The destruction of the Temple was allowed by G-d due to behavior of Jews. On both occasions.

The ark is not missing. It has not yet been restored to the Temple because, obviously, the Third Temple has yet to be built.

I'm not going anywhere near Jewish apocalypticism.

CaDan · Apr 25, 2008

GerTzedek said:
What do you mean by "industrial war"??? Economics? You mean all those stories about kamakazis are made up?

To some extent economics. What I mean is an industrialized state that can field armies and navies. That is in contrast to groups hiding in caves and apartments with a couple of RPGs. Sure, the latter can kill a couple of people, but they are really no threat to another industrialized state.

CaDan · Apr 25, 2008

Whoah! . . . bed time for me!

GeratTzedek · Apr 25, 2008

there will always be threats. there will always be wars. the reason G-d required the anhilaton of amalek was not becuase they waqrred against israel, but HOW they warred: terrorism.

GeratTzedek · Apr 25, 2008

Not true at all. The USA is an industrialized state. Al Queda wants to live in the dark agews. yet Al Queda is a threat to to the USA

uberd00b · Apr 25, 2008

GerTzedek said:
Not true at all. The USA is an industrialized state. Al Queda wants to live in the dark agews. yet Al Queda is a threat to to the USA

Al Quaeda is in no way a threat to the USA. That's ridiculous, a small band of armed militants? What are they going to do invade?

Perspective is a wonderful thing to have.

Erfan777 · Apr 25, 2008

uberd00b said:
Al Quaeda is in no way a threat to the USA. That's ridiculous, a small band of armed militants? What are they going to do invade?

Perspective is a wonderful thing to have.

Do you actually know whats going on around the world? Or do you close your eyes and pretend nothing has happened?
Al Qaeda although may not have the power to invade USA. but it surely does have the power to launch attack not only at USA but other countries even, killing innocent civilian and much destruction.

Secundulus · Apr 25, 2008

mikkyo said:
Ok fine, let me ask you this. Do you really think we can eliminate terrorism in the world? Does tit for tat really work with Old Testament laws and Islamic ideologies?

Eliminate it entirely? No. Make it extremely painful for those countries and organizations who preach it and fund it? Yes

Secundulus · Apr 25, 2008

CaDan said:
It is arguable that the Celts (Gauls) ended up actually taking over the Roman Empire in the West--they just didn't call themselves Celts anymore once they assimilated.

Actually, that would be the Franks who conquered Gaul after Rome lost the capacity to defend itself.

uberd00b · Apr 25, 2008

Erfan777 said:
Do you actually know whats going on around the world? Or do you close your eyes and pretend nothing has happened?
Al Qaeda although may not have the power to invade USA. but it surely does have the power to launch attack not only at USA but other countries even, killing innocent civilian and much destruction.

Yes of course I'm aware of what is going on. More people are killed in automobile accidents than in terrorist attacks.

Next up: War on Traffic!

Al Quaeda are a minor threat. Don't believe the hype.

mikkyo · Apr 25, 2008

GerTzedek said:
Do you think you can eliminate murder, theft, child molestation? Yet the fact it cannot be entirely irradicated is no excuse for letting it run rampant and excusing it.

Yes in your own country. Although it is impossible to police the entire world.

Amalek

Regular Member

I remember orange CF

The Emperor has no clothes.

I remember orange CF

I remember orange CF

Meaning Righteous Proselyte to Judaism

Meaning Righteous Proselyte to Judaism

Regular Member

Meaning Righteous Proselyte to Judaism

I remember orange CF

I remember orange CF

I remember orange CF

Meaning Righteous Proselyte to Judaism

Meaning Righteous Proselyte to Judaism

The Emperor has no clothes.

deleted123

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

The Emperor has no clothes.

Regular Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency