Resha Caner
Expert Fool
In answer to the question, it would mean the one pushing the button wasn't responsible. I thought we nixed that excuse for the Nazis.
So you agree with it? Do you know the king's reply?
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I think it's great. How do you mean to apply it?
I can see already this is a discussion with no end. My point would be that for Israel to agree to such would mean they are no longer Israel. There would be some kind of political organization living in that geographic area, but it wouldn't embody the national identity now known as Israel.
So, what is it you want from the political organization living in that geographic area?
Hmm. Odd. I don't think Netanyahu would agree with you. I wouldn't consider Obama pro-Israel. He seems to work with them reluctantly. If you want pro-Israel you need to speak more of someone like Reagan.
Granted Carter had a good run at it. He was closer to success than anyone since. But if it's not sustainable ...
In answer to the question, it would mean the one pushing the button wasn't responsible. I thought we nixed that excuse for the Nazis.
So you agree with it? Do you know the king's reply?
Whoa, did Israel not have a national identity before 1967? Of course it did. A two state, contiguous solution simply restores things back to (with a few slight modifications mutually agreed on) the pre-1967 borders.
Right, but who does this button pushing apply to here and in what way?
And let's remember that the US is the world's number one supporter of Israel, even to the point of constantly saving it from legitimate and often unanimous UN reprimands toward Israel. If we get into a third world war, it has a great chance of being because of the crimes of Israel. And I don't like to think about my countrymen dying for crimes, whether for oil or an imagined victimization which really hides predation.
In your opinion, why do you think the US is and has been such a strong supporter of Israel?
The Israeli Lobby, AIPAC (see Mearsheimer's and Walt's book on the subject, and these dudes are both conservatives), the religious fundamentalism in this country that equates supporting Israel with not considering or chastising its behavior, and probably some degree of indirect resource (oil) management by having an ally in the middle east.
Very influential lobby in fact, that has been working for over 100 years. Many military and state department people opposed such an aggressive support of Israel, many many decades ago, but they were overruled by the politicians, who were significantly influenced by the lobbyist efforts.
Totally. We should probably add cultural guilt for the Holocaust, and how tradition just perpetuates itself because it's tradition.
Yes, the holocaust helped the process along, but the lobbying efforts were deeply entrenched and already showing dividends even before the holocaust.
Hmm. Now you're starting to sound like conspiracy theorists. There may be individuals doing such things, and maybe they try to appropriate certain banners, but when you start talking of major ethnic groups doing this and that ... you're not too far from Jews controlling all the banks in the world.
Hmm. Now you're starting to sound like conspiracy theorists. There may be individuals doing such things, and maybe they try to appropriate certain banners, but when you start talking of major ethnic groups doing this and that ... you're not too far from Jews controlling all the banks in the world.
So, who is really responsible...in war, for the death of a civilian?
The soldier who pulls the trigger? The officer who deployed him? The politician who committed them? The enemy who provoked them?
In answer to the question, it would mean the one pushing the button wasn't responsible. I thought we nixed that excuse for the Nazis.
...in war, for the death of a civilian?
The soldier who pulls the trigger? The officer who deployed him? The politician who committed them? The enemy who provoked them?
The question is prompted by the deaths of some 1200 people in Gaza, mostly civilians, many of whom were non-combatant women and children.
And, I am getting tired of Israel blaming their disproportionate violence on Hamas. I am not a Hamas supporter; firing off rockets in the hope of killing Jews is not an activity I would encourage or endorse. But I think the morality of the situation to be more complex and nuanced than Israeli apologists would have us believe. I wonder if anyone else here is looking for a principle that assigns appropriately moral responsibility where such responsibility is due, in a situation such as we have in the middle-east?
Best wishes, Strivax.
The so-called 'State of Israel' (really the end-time tribe of Judah) is simply fulfilling the prophecies concerning it.
And you know what? There's not a dadgum thing saying that the real Israel would use such criminal actions to achieve this end.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?