So, because your example is not representative, that makes Undertoad's example also not representative?

You serious?

First, the New York Times is a newspaper whose trying to make money over forcing a political point. They may have a slant, which ironically isn't convincing Americans that Arab culture is different than ours, but they mainly post articles that will get readers attention. That is an article that will get peoples attention.

You are trying to make a point. You are trying to convince people on this forum that Arab culture is fundamentally different than Western culture. The New York Times isn't.

Second, it was you who posted the article on this forum, not the New York Times.


So no, I still agree that the two cultures are fundamentally different but I think you are taking it to the extreme. Have you never heard of 21 year old American soldiers who say the want to die fighting for their country? Do you realize that the militant's view is not the majority? Even the New York Times names the title of the article "Fighter Sees His Paradise in Gaza’s Pain", which first names the fighter as singular and then Gaza, the majority, as in pain, not happy.

I would think the article's title separates the soldier from the civilian population, not the rest of the soldiers, or the leadership.

The news source where Undertoad got his example from makes the point that fighter isn't representative of the majority. Do you honestly think that the majority of Gazans are happy they are being killed?

I forget the name of the term, but don't fall into the trap thinking that everyone in a different culture thinks the same. Their views are just as diverse as us, also leaving room for complete psychos like the one that Undertoad posted.

Then why the fuck is Undertoad posting articles how Arab culture is fundamentally different than ours. Then also, why didn't Undertoad point that out for himself. Keep in mind, Hamas makes up less than 1% of the Gazan population.

Edit- My fault, the guy wasn't Hamas.

You're making the wrong (illogical) differentiations. Nobody thinks, or has suggested that. Stop and think for a minute.

You've lost the plot. I'm out.

Rather curious that America - that once could understand and communicate with different cultures all over the world - suddenly has a problem only during part of the past decade.

Let's see. Turkey was one of the nations described by UT’s article. And Turkey (before George Jr) had a 90 something percent approval rating of America. In NATO, Turkey and American had some of the strongest friendships. Funny how their culture was so different that Turkey ended up being one of America's closest friends.

And then wackos came to power. Suddenly the 90+% approval rating dropped to something below 10%. Clearly there were too many cultural differences. Maybe Turks can only understand nations lead by leaders not supported by TheMercenary? Ahhh but I jest ... using reality.

Damm, you left out a reference to Rush Limberger and wacko extremists! You're slipping Ted. :lol2:

You mean I forgot to mention your IQ again? No wonder you would love to like George Jr's dic. Oh. Profanity? Just trying to make TheMercenary feel more at home.

You forgot Bin Laden and Rush.

You regurgitate what they tell you to say everyday. How could I forget them - or your wife that you are trying to sell in another thread - you turd.

When do you get an original thought other than to attack others? Welcome to the Cellar that TheMercenary works so hard to create.

That's quite enough, Thomas.

No UT it is not enough. We when through this exact same thing with classicman months ago. Apparently you (or someone else) gave him some very strong words about doing personal attacks. He stopped. The cellar returned to honest discussions. And now both he and TheMercenary are doing it again to multiple posters.

I only posted like TheMercenary for one day. Did that shock finally get your attention? He has been doing it for months. You only respond because my tone has changed sharply? That tone is acceptable because TheMercenary does it routinely? You banned others (ie April) for much less. Routine personal attacks are acceptable from TheMercenary UG and others? But being a teenage girl probably begging for help is not? Expect me to post attacks as the wacko extremist have been doing for years. TheMercenary says he whores out his wife (as he posted elsewhere). But the dripping gonerhea he got is now routinely in his posts. Its only acceptable from him?

Meanwhile, the wacko extremists only increased their personal attacks. That is acceptable because it is them? No. That means personal attacks are now a new Cellar standard.

I stop when the problem is solved as I did with classicman many months ago. You want me to stop. Then you next attack the problem - the personal attacks by the wacko extremists on other Cellar contributors.

Don't drag me into your squabble with another poster. Do not lump me in with another poster and try to act like YOU are the victim. No one, not UT nor Bruce nor Wolf, NO ONE said a damn thing to me.

And don't you dare think that for a friggin second I will not keep calling you out when you make claims as fact that are completely unsubstantiated. I have not personally attacked you at all, in months because its what I alone chose to do. You are not worth dragging me down into your petty BS as a diversionary tactic when you are called out to cite or back up your claims. You have been called out recently about your claims again and coincidentally you start this crap again. Curious.

No Thomas, compared to what you're doing now, everything directed at you was pretty minor stuff. And had a point. Now you've just thrown a lot of garbage all over several threads. It looks like a hissy fit and is ridiculous. Stop it.

I do find it funny that Merc endlessly carped about a Cellar "double standard" when he was ruining threads in the beginning, and now seeks refuge under sensible moderation and somebody else is screaming double standard at him. I also find it funny that for years tw lectured about how silly it is to be provoked by the likes of Barak, and has now been rather easily provoked, to the point of tantrum.

The new dynamic. When you provide no facts for your doubts, then "cite" means I will return with attacks on your intelligence. Your 'calling out someone' is classic Limbaugh - the subtle mockery of another poster and not really a request for knowledge.

"Cite' without the long reason why you are confused is openly declared a personal attack. Posting without contributing additional facts to the question as you routinely do - that was what you were doing months ago when I finally put an end to it. Deja vue. You want more. Then keep it up.

It is a simple benchmark, classicman. Any request for a citation from you must include additional facts to justify your doubts. Your reign of passive aggressive attacks on others is no longer tolerated. Your every post is expected to contribute new information. Your one word 'cite' nonsense is now considered mockery of another. You want a citation? Then prove in that post that you have the knowledge or intelligence to justify that request. Limbaugh style challenges from you are now considered personal attacks.

I don't care who started. I just want you to stop it.

Since when does asking someone to substantiate a claim require anything? tw made the claim now tw is responsible to back it up.

Since when did tw get to decide what the rules are in the cellar?

Responsible posters do that routinely. You don't. You do what is typicaly of and encouraged by wacko extremist. You need clarification. Good. State why by contributing facts rather than posting personal challenges.

That's bullshit. Questioning unsubstantiated statements is not a personal attack. Calling someone a turd for doing so, is a personal attack.:eyebrow:

Your long standing habit of ignoring questions about your claims has damaged your credibility, which will cause more people to request citation... or just dismiss you as a twit.

FTR

Finally to get back on topic........

Iran renews efforts to supply Hamas

This just absolutely amazes me. Why does Hamas need any more weapons? I know that the same could be asked of Israel, but they have a lot more enemies. Nice to see that a lot of aid is getting into Gaza though. Especially interesting were the Palestinians who went to Israel for medical care.

Tw, you've just managed to move from "Unlikeable" to "Disgusting."

When people stop teaching their children to hate, then there will be an end to it all... But unfortunately I don't ever see that happening, the hatred is just too ingrained.

Tell it to the Muslims.

Yeah. 'Cause no Jewish parents teach their children to hate.

I would not support that statement. Nor did I imply it.

They certainly don't teach it the way Hamas does.

That is so wrong on so many levels. It just shows that some people do not want peace at all. They are more interested in hate, destruction and death.

Maybe a nuclear holocaust in the Mideast is not such a bad idea after all.

In some seasons the prevailing winds are from the west. Look where the fallout blows.

Given the actions of the Palestinians, why ever would they need to, uh, fill in?

Really, DanaC, an excessive and ill-considered bias to the Arabs looks like antisemitism from here. What are you going to do about that? You're shaking the pompoms for a bunch who cry "Victim, Victim!" all the hours of the day, while the whole of their actions scream "Perp! Perp!"

It disgusts the aware and open-eyed.

How bout you go find somewhere nice and quiet, and fuck yourself senseless with something sharp? No offense.

That has to be the most polite "fork off" I've ever read.
lol

Dana - you are sworn off this thread, remember?
You can't do any good here.

No. No you're quite right. This is not a good thread for me to be in.

This is the bestest threadest EVAH for you to be in.

I was surprised to learn that Israel censors military info and even banned international reporters from conflict areas. Here is an underground site called Israeli Uncensored News http://samsonblinded.org/news which runs some very odd reports.

Ah. Welp, it's long been my view that being hostile to the cause of the one full, highly successful democracy in the Middle East is the province of the rather slow of mind.

In other words, you're at least somewhat antisemitic, and you're on the wrong side, and you can't defend your position. Sorry, m'girl. Here, why don't you borrow this sharp thing? Oh, and this tube of lube.:p

Then it's time to fucking reform, DanaC. What you're doing is the kind of thing that raises American hackles.

Now that the Israel/Hamas cease-fire is on, what is Hamas doing? Going around shooting people.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...prisal-attacks

It's mob rule. It's also called, kill the moderates until only the extremists are left, a cult of blood and death, and the innocent people who are terrified by them.

The world demanded the end of Israel's occupation of Gaza. The world now has what it wanted. I'm not sure why the world doesn't think this blood is on their hands. It remains, as the Guardian says, "Israel's war". Hamas terrorism will not move Jimmy Carter, who believes that negotiation with Hamas is critical to the plan:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/am...298296434.html

You got that? The US and Israel are responsible. Not Hamas shooting Fatah supporters in the kneecaps. Israel was responsible when it occupied, and now Israel is responsible when it has left.

And thus, unabated by any criticism, supported by all countries everywhere, violence the source of all Hamas' power... the shooting will continue.

sar/oh, poor Hamas. Its not their fault. They were forced to attack and kill them - don't you see it?/casm

I love that analogy.

Israel has been committing human rights violations against Palestinans for decades. Just because they are a "legitimate" government does not mean they are not also terrorists. If we didn't fund Israel to the tune of about $3 billion/year maybe they could actually work out their differences.

When Britain originally made a deal with Zionists for the land (which happened behind the backs of the Arabs, who had agreed to help Britain fight the Germans, and T. E. Lawrence, who was the British liaison officer to the Arabs), it was supposed to protect the people who already lived on the land by limiting the number of Jews who could migrate there. That did not last long. The huge influx of Jews and displacement of Palestinians is probably the main reason why the fighting started to begin with, because before this backroom agreement with Zionists, the Jews who lived there and the Palestianins who lived there got along. It was the Zionists who caused the problem.

Israel had many terrorist organizations well before the PLO and Hamas existed. The reason why Britain decided to leave and wash their hands of the mess they created is because the Zionist organization Irgun, led by Menecham Begin, blew up the King David Hotel in July 1946, killing almost 100 people, including Jews. Funny how Begin later became a respected and validated political leader, after being a terrorist, along with other political leaders in Israeli history. (Funny how we now call it Jewish resistance, and call Palestinian resistance terrorists).

After Israel declared themselves a state, they legitimized their terrorist acts against the people who had been living on that land for hundreds of years, and by default, the Palestinians, who were fighting a resistance against an invader who was put there by a foreign country, became the bad guys.

I am not defending the actions of either people. Personally, I don't understand why they can't just get along with one another and peacefully share the land. But I certainly understand the Palestinians fight more, because they are fighting for their land, for their freedom in their own land, and for their dignity. The Israeli government has systematically driven the Palestinians onto smaller and smaller tracts of land. And the settlements someone mentioned that they gave back, those settlements were created after forcibly removing Palestinians from their homes and putting them in camps, and then bulldozing the houses to make way for homes for Israelis. And if they refuse to leave, they bulldoze right over the people. In fact, an Israeli soldier killed an American student who was there protesting in 2003 with a bulldozer. And that is not the only example of Israeli military brutally killing innocent protesters or peace activists from other countries who are there trying to help Palestinians. I don't know how anyone in their right mind can condone such behavior from a supposed "democratic" country.

He said, she said. Who struck first. They all need to STFU & start over like adults. There is so much friggin blame to go around its pointless to mention it.
The problem as some here have pointed out, is that they are teaching their children HATE.
Nothing will change until that does.

Well said.

Why? Israel routinely tries to censor/control information about what they do. Don't all governments who engage in war?

Yes, of course - every single entity that engages in war censors as much as possible - In fact most of what you hear that isn't censored is intentionally leaked and misleading.

They are both teaching hate, by example.

It's like this, a prisoner from GITMO was released by the Bush administration awhile back, and now he is apparently an al qaeda leader in Yemen. This man had claimed he was innocent when he was captured, but he was detained for years, with no trial. So the question is, what if he actually WAS innocent, but because we detained him for so long (and probably tortured him), and he grew to hate us so much, did we actually create an al qaeda leader?

I see a very real resemblance here with us/Iraq and Israel/Palestine - big strong country with an army, fighting a resistance movement. Many Americans hate the Iraqi insurgency, but did we not create that hate ourselves, by our actions in THEIR country? (OK, so we are not colonizing or staying, but we are certainly occupying, and have in some cases acted atrociously.)

i love that movie. :D

Me too...must rent again.

Lets look at the facts.

A six month ceasefire occurred on June 19th, 2008 between Israel and Hamas on the conditions that Hamas would stop firing rockets into Israel and Israel would allow humanitarian aid into Gaza, which is very much needed.

Lets look at the stats. The following is a graph showing rocket attacks into Israel from Gaza.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._gaza_2008.JPG

We can clearly see that Hamas made a very good attempt to stop rocket fire into Israel from the start of the ceasefire until November. The numbers on wikipedia say rocket fire dropped 98% and keep in mind their are other factions besides Hamas in Gaza and have taken responsibility for a few of those rocket fires while the others remain unclaimed.

On the other hand, during this time, humanitarian aid into Gaza increased only 20%. Yes, there are legitimate reasons for Israel to block off humanitarian aid but they did not live up to their side of the ceasefire as Hamas did.

Now that brings us to November, when rocket and mortar attacks increased dramatically. What happened during this period?

On November 4th, Israeli intelligence got hold of information saying that a kidnapping of an Israeli soldier was going to take place through a tunnel between Gaza and Israel. To prevent this, Israel when into Gaza and killed six militants. After this event, we can see a very sharp increase in rocket fire.

So with this information we can come to conclusions.

• Neither Israel nor Hamas truly respected or lived up to the ceasefire
• The reason for Hamas attacks are because of the blockade and siege. November 4th was a catalysis, but the ceasefire was obviously not going to last.
• Israel was the first to officially break the ceasefire. November 4th was a very big mistake on their part. This is also assuming Israeli intelligence was correct.

Besides the irony of saying it is pointless to mention blame and then blaming Hamas for teaching children to hate, we really do need to change our method of viewing this situation. This problem can never be solved on moral philosophy, both sides will always think they are the morally correct side, and should be viewed as a power issue.

For example, the method of fighting by both Hamas and Israel should be seen as immoral but necessary because of the power disparity between the two sides. Hamas cannot fight with any other method besides the one they are doing now and Israel cannot either. To blame either side for their methods of fighting is pointless, idealistic, and will not solve anything. Neither side will change.

Actually, we've gone over that one in detail here, and proved in two posts that he was a jihadi before capture, by his own words.

No. If you had noticed what the Iraqi insurgency used to do, before we crushed it, you would not be trying to develop this narrative.

They killed everybody, beheading the children and even shooting the livestock, and buried them in shallow graves.

It is once again the necessary violence of mob rule. The ones with the biggest guns and the will to use them against innocents, are the ones who get to run things. This is unacceptable and will only lead to more violence. The old policy was to support it if the end leader was friendly with the west. THAT is the corrupt ideology you should be fighting against as it only leads to more death and destruction.

OK. I don't know whether he was or not, but that analogy still holds. We are creating terrorists by our actions.



We never should have been there in the first place. We drew first blood. And I agree with your last statement, to the degree that we should not do business with governments that are corrupt and abuse their own people.

PH - READ CAREFULLY - Where did I mention Hamas in my post? I specifically did not.

There is no win here for anyone. Whether anyone concedes land or whatever else the other side wants. They are all at fault. They don't know how to, nor (I believe) want to live in peace. Everything in their existence is based upon hate for the others.
*Note* I have not specified one side versus the other - its all of them it IS who and what they and their culture is based upon.

Hamas's very charter clearly states that its goal is the destruction of Israel. From Hamas point of view, the cease fire was made so that it could restock its supply of weapons, which it did by sea and through smuggling tunnels.The basic truth is that if Hamas doesn't fight, Israel doesn't fight. Please acknowledge that basic truth.

Please retract that first statement as I intentionally did not specify Hamas at all. YOU read that into the post...interesting.

Your last line was best *BOLD MINE*

Agreed

No no, don't just gloss over that one because it hurts your approach. Think on a straight line here. We proved it by his own words. You now know that he was. This is an important data point.

That's a common notion, what is your proof of it?

Then where are the Bosnian terrorists we created?

Where are the Panamanian terrorists we created?

Where are the Grenadan terrorists we created?

Where in holy hell are the Vietnamese terrorists we created? There had better be 500,000 of them, or your narrative is crashing and burning badly.

:flamer:

My fault. Sorry about that again.

I disagree that these people do not want to live in peace. I believe they are just like everyone else. They want to live in peace under their own terms. The problem is that the terms directly contradict each other and that is why the violence will not stop.

It has been mentioned that Hamas would be willing to accept a two state solution on 1948 (I think??) lines. I do not believe that Hamas will pursue the total destruction of Israel because they know that is unrealistic unless a great power shift occurs. These comments are more than likely just hype to get a political and popular base.

Even if their goal was "pure", corruption would enter eventually. It always does.

I acknowledge that fact but that is only part of this situation. As I said in my earlier post, this is a power disparity problem, not a moral one. Israel has control of all food, water, and energy resources, has the backing of the strongest nation in the world, and have the economic power to hold its own. Hamas does not. White collared criminals do not need to use violence to hurt others but blue collared criminals do. Once again, it comes down to power. So even though your statement is true on a violence scale, it does not represent the situation as an entirety.