U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-22-2009, 09:15 AM
 
Location: Chicagoland
41,312 posts, read 42,418,708 times
Reputation: 7113

Advertisements

Quote:
Why doesnt the US army have a Base in Israel
I would think it obvious. They don't need our help - their military is second to none.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-23-2009, 03:48 PM
 
Location: Michigan
12,712 posts, read 12,623,379 times
Reputation: 4165
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamontnow View Post
I'm not referring to those who criticize this or that policy of Israel. I'm referring to those who's purpose is to delegitimize Israel's right to exist. And a state which has no right to exist, by definition has no right to defend itself or any other rights. Such hatred, of course, contributes nothing constructive toward a discussion of a peaceful solution.
Why are you suggesting that disputing a state's right to exist can be motivated only by hatred? Have there never been any states that had no right to exist? Manchukuo, for instance? Or Vichy France? Or the Union of South Africa? Or Republika Srpska? Why is Israel the only country whose bona fides can't be challenged without accusations of "hatred" being unleashed?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2009, 07:10 PM
 
Location: Fondren SW Yo
2,783 posts, read 6,333,726 times
Reputation: 2223
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques View Post
Why are you suggesting that disputing a state's right to exist can be motivated only by hatred? Have there never been any states that had no right to exist? Manchukuo, for instance? Or Vichy France? Or the Union of South Africa? Or Republika Srpska? Why is Israel the only country whose bona fides can't be challenged without accusations of "hatred" being unleashed?
Because Israel is a member state of the United Nations. Which other UN member states regularly have their bona fides challenged?

If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, chances are it's a duck. Quack.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2009, 07:33 PM
 
Location: Michigan
12,712 posts, read 12,623,379 times
Reputation: 4165
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb4browns View Post
Because Israel is a member state of the United Nations. Which other UN member states regularly have their bona fides challenged?
Going back only as far the formation of the UN: The Republic of China. The Republic of South Vietnam (defunct). The Union of South Africa (defunct). Northern Rhodesia (defunct). Southern Rhodesia (defunct). Democratic Kampuchea (defunct). The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (defunct). I'm sure there are some I could add if I had the time.

If I were permitted to add all examples of colonial domination by UN members that have been condemned by the world community, it would triple or quadruple the list. Trouble is, Israel has no home country from which it projects domination. It's a geographical and diplomatic mistake that was born, and only can exist, as a parasite.

Quote:
If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, chances are it's a duck. Quack.
Woof.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2009, 08:14 PM
 
Location: Fondren SW Yo
2,783 posts, read 6,333,726 times
Reputation: 2223
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques View Post
Going back only as far the formation of the UN: The Republic of China. The Republic of South Vietnam (defunct). The Union of South Africa (defunct). Northern Rhodesia (defunct). Southern Rhodesia (defunct). Democratic Kampuchea (defunct). The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (defunct). I'm sure there are some I could add if I had the time.

If I were permitted to add all examples of colonial domination by UN members that have been condemned by the world community, it would triple or quadruple the list. Trouble is, Israel has no home country from which it projects domination. It's a geographical and diplomatic mistake that was born, and only can exist, as a parasite.



Woof.
Nice try, but why is it that you go through a laundry list of "defunct" states, territories that were never recognized as a UN member state (northern Rhodesia) and a country who the UN does not recognize (Taiwan)? I guess it is because that is easier to do than recognize hypocrisy or worse - that Jew hatred motivates anti-Israel sentiment. We're not talking objection to the policies of the Jewish state, we're talking about objection to the existence of the Jewish state.

"Parasite?" Quack quack indeed.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2009, 08:25 PM
 
Location: Michigan
12,712 posts, read 12,623,379 times
Reputation: 4165
Quote:
Originally Posted by rb4browns View Post
Nice try, but why is it that you go through a laundry list of "defunct" states, territories that were never recognized as a UN member state (northern Rhodesia) and a country who the UN does not recognize (Taiwan)?
Taiwan was recognized until 1971, and was then booted out. The same should happen to Israel, which deserves to be a pariah much more than Taiwan.

Quote:
I guess it is because that is easier to do than recognize hypocrisy or worse - that Jew hatred motivates anti-Israel sentiment.
It doesn't; that is merely a cheap and hysterical libel to silence critics, as almost anyone can tell.

Quote:
We're not talking objection to the policies of the Jewish state, we're talking about objection to the existence of the Jewish state.
So effing what? Was opposition to the existence of the Union of South Africa motivated by "anti-Afrikaans sentiment"?

Quote:
"Parasite?" Quack quack indeed.
They moved in, and they stole someone else's country at gunpoint because, by their own admission, they had no other territory and they felt entitled to one. Rolling back their aggression completely demands the obsolescence of their state. If that doesn't fit the definition of "parasite" then nothing on earth does.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2009, 08:29 PM
 
8,648 posts, read 16,334,985 times
Reputation: 4604
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugguy View Post
I doubt you've ever even been outside of Texas. LOL....funny that you can't really dispute anything I've said, you can only call names, etc. Typical illogical America hater.
Woops. Time to get the bug spray out...
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2009, 08:30 PM
 
1,263 posts, read 2,227,437 times
Reputation: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques View Post
Why is Israel the only country whose bona fides can't be challenged
There are about 200 countries in this world. All sorts of countries. Despotic, the worst military dictatorships, even declared by the UN to be genocidal. Of all these countries it is only Israel's right to exist that you deny. Let me ask your question with one very slight change: Why is Israel the only country whose bona fides can be challenged?

You have a sinister motivation. If it walks like a duck....
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2009, 08:44 PM
 
Location: Michigan
12,712 posts, read 12,623,379 times
Reputation: 4165
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamontnow View Post
There are about 200 countries in this world. All sorts of countries. Despotic, the worst military dictatorships, even declared by the UN to be genocidal. Of all these countries it is only Israel's right to exist that you deny. Let me ask your question with one very slight change: Why is Israel the only country whose bona fides can be challenged?
Because in most other cases, the problems are caused by (1) a tyrant or clique or ruling class from within the nation that oppresses the nation or (2) an imperial power that oppresses other nations from its home turf. Israel has no home turf; they abruptly landed on the backs of another people and yelled "MINE!" That the remedy for that historical crime requires their entire state to be abolished is therefore not a condition that applies in other cases.

If you are suggesting that those opposed to Israel are not opposed to the brutal dictatorships in Burma, North Korea, the evidently dictatorial new order in Iran, etc., I would love to know how you came to believe this.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-23-2009, 08:47 PM
 
Location: Fondren SW Yo
2,783 posts, read 6,333,726 times
Reputation: 2223
Quote:
Originally Posted by djacques View Post
Taiwan was recognized until 1971, and was then booted out. The same should happen to Israel, which deserves to be a pariah much more than Taiwan.



It doesn't; that is merely a cheap and hysterical libel to silence critics, as almost anyone can tell.



So effing what? Was opposition to the existence of the Union of South Africa motivated by "anti-Afrikaans sentiment"?



They moved in, and they stole someone else's country at gunpoint because, by their own admission, they had no other territory and they felt entitled to one. Rolling back their aggression completely demands the obsolescence of their state. If that doesn't fit the definition of "parasite" then nothing on earth does.
Hmmm, "someone else's country?" You mean Great Britain's, or you must mean the Ottomans, or wait you mean the Mamluks, or wait I know, you mean the Arabians who invaded from the Arabian Peninsula in Mohammed's Blitzkrieg, or do you mean the Byzantines or the Romans, or do you mean the Jews who were ethnically cleansed by the Romans in the first century of the common era? Read that long run on sentence again and tell me which "their" the country was "stolen" from.

And here is dictionary.com's definition of "parasite" since you seem to be struggling with the word.

1. an organism that lives on or in an organism of another species, known as the host, from the body of which it obtains nutriment.
2. a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another or others without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives on the hospitality of others.
3. (in ancient Greece) a person who received free meals in return for amusing or impudent conversation, flattering remarks, etc.

It is also, ironically enough, a word used for centuries in a derogatory way towards Jews. Isn't that ironic? Don't you think?
Quack.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:57 AM.

© 2005-2021, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top