Israel vs. Palestine?

[Nyx]

I can't say I know much about this conflict but lately it has come to my attention (due to some disturbing videos & articles & my parents ongoing discussions) & I'm wondering, what do you guys think about this conflict?
Should Israel cease fire? What settlement can they reach? What settlement would be FAIR? (& I ask those questions seperately because I don't think the answers can in any way be the same). How can this conflict ever end? & lastly, how do you think it will end?

EDIT:
I forgot something: And how do you think we can help the conflict?

[dj4ever]

I don't know a lot about this issue but I'm certainly interested in hearing what other people think.

[Zombified]

I also don't know lots about this, I've been a bit out of touch with the news lately.

I'm sure someone is going to call out what I say and start a debate, but fuck it.

Israel is picked on all the time.
A lot of it is stupid religious bullshit and loads of "Holy Land" crap.

If you were bullied in school all the time, smacked, beated, called names, and this went on everyday for months, what would you do?

Either ask for help and see if that works or fight back.

Israel has taken a lot of shit over the years and their recent offensive strikes are just ways of saying, "Stop fucking around with us".

Should they stop the bombing and fighting? Yes.

But at the same time, they have to keep up a strong front.

It goes both ways I guess.

[Shaun]

And yes, Zombie, someone is going to call you out. Me, because I held very similar beliefs until recently when I actually delved a little into the situation.

The basic story of what is going on is this:
Israel and Hamas came to a cease fire not long ago and Israel promised to allow a certain amount of movement in and out of the Gaza Strip for food, supplies, aid, and other such things that any country needs (you know, the good stuff). Well, Israel didn't hold up to its end of the bargain. Instead of letting 100% of what it promised go through, they reduced it to a much smaller number (something like 20%). The fact is that the Gaza Strip doesn't exactly have a lot of ways to protect itself or defend itself. It's small, it doesn't have a powerful military, and the one nation that it has the most problems with is supported by one of the most powerful nations in the world (the U.S.). It doesn't have a lot in the way of recourse for anything, particularly when everyone paints them as terrorists (Hamas, that is). So, after getting tired of it, Hamas started launching rockets into Israel. Then Israel fired back. The rockets didn't stop and Israel invaded (though I think they would have invaded anyway), and now we have Israel on the loose offering ridiculous conditions for a cease fire (you know, like saying, well okay, we'll stop, but we're only going to let 15% of your stuff through now). That's sort of the lame duck version of what is going on. It's not 100% accurate, but you get the basic idea.

Now, my thoughts on everything else:
First off, Israel has every right to defend itself. The U.S. would retaliate and I expect any other nation to do the same when attacked. The problem with Israel, however, is that it doesn't listen to anyone, much like the U.S. (and I suspect a lot of what makes us such a boneheaded country has rubbed off on them). A lot of bad things have been happening in Gaza right now, particularly attacks on civilizians and UN trucks and pretty much the whole world is saying stop. Israel needs to stop. Hamas has, contrary to the media we're all familiar with here in the U.S., already agreed to a cease fire on more than one occasion. They're defeated. All they have at this point is terrorist nonsense. They can't talk to Israel, because they both hate each other for basically the same reason (they both want to exterminate the other one), and trying to mediate through the U.S. has, unfortunately, failed miserably. Israel, unfortunately, needs to reassess its program, because at this point it is going to end up the first target for a lot more than just the nations surrounding it. The U.S. needs to take stricter measures in assuring that Israel stops and good peace talks start happening.
Is there a solution? Yes and no. There is no easy solution. Israel has to stop being so utterly xenophobic, for one, considering that technically speaking Israel wasn't their land anymore. It may be holy, but that's a shitty reason to take someone's shit and then discriminate against them. The only way for there to be a full, peaceful resolution is if both groups change. Will that happen? Probably not. In all honesty, extremist religion (and Israel has one, by the way, along with Hamas and many of the muslim groups in the area) has remained relatively steady since it's inception. The only thing that changes are the tools used.

The only guaranteed solution at this point is to do the following:
The U.S. needs to join in and demand an immediate cease fire from both Hamas and Israel. Israel should be forced either by the U.S. or the U.N. to allow 100% of all necessary supplies to be sent into Gaza and Israel should offer its support in rebuilding what it has destroyed. Hamas and Israel should then be placed in a room and told to find peaceful solutions that don't involve murdering one another. It's possible, but it involves both groups being tolerant and non-assholes. The problem is that things were improving. The U.S. was getting very close to hopefully fostering some sort of truce between Israel and its neighbors, but Israel has totally effed itself now. I don't think the people who run Israel realize it would only take about two nukes from Iran to destroy it completely, and the way Israel has been acting isn't giving the Iranians much reason to hesitate. Israel is the outsider there and while the various arabic nations may not agree or even like each other, they don't take shit from anybody and are more than willing to aid their fellow arabs against a common foe (something the west needs to learn badly, because the U.N. is by far one of the most useless, pointless organizations since the League of Nations).

But that's what I say...

[Nyx]

I also don't know lots about this, I've been a bit out of touch with the news lately.

I'm sure someone is going to call out what I say and start a debate, but fuck it.

Israel is picked on all the time.
A lot of it is stupid religious bullshit and loads of "Holy Land" crap.

If you were bullied in school all the time, smacked, beated, called names, and this went on everyday for months, what would you do?

Either ask for help and see if that works or fight back.

Israel has taken a lot of shit over the years and their recent offensive strikes are just ways of saying, "Stop fucking around with us".

Should they stop the bombing and fighting? Yes.

But at the same time, they have to keep up a strong front.

It goes both ways I guess.


Israel has been bullied? Israel IS the bully. Palestinians have been pushed out of there land by Israel & Israel has crushed so many of their homes, that's not being bullied, that's BEING a bully.



I'm with Shaun though I don't see what agreement they could come to?

I see it unlikely that Israel would be willing to share the land.

I think the most important thing right now is as shaun said, getting 100% of all necessary supplies to be sent into Gaza.

What really bothers me about this issue, is that whenever I turn on the TV or read the local paper, there's tons & tons of talk about 3 or 4 Israelis that are killed(which is fair BUT) and there's just barely a mention of the 100s of palestinians killed.
^ that tells me that Israelis already have the upper hand (they're getting more people to side with Israel so that people won't consider the lives or care about the lives of palestinians much), so I wonder, are they ever going to stop? To let the people in Gaza get the aid they need?

[Shaun]

To be fair, Nyx, Israel is surrounding by nations that would like nothing more than to see every Jew and Israeli murdered. So, in some respects I can understand the Israeli standard of overreaction. Israel has to assert domination to a certain extent there to show that it isn't one to be trifled with, otherwise every Jew would likely have been exterminated a long time ago. But, Israel is clinging to old ways right now and needs to grow up and realize that overreaction and selfishness will not accomplish anything but more violence.

You are right, though, about Israel being somewhat of a bully. Technically all the land that was there wasn't owned by the Jews (I mean, technically the Jews had it a long long time ago, but this is like saying that after I was evicted from my house, I've decided to come back and steal it from you some 500 years later; just doesn't compute).

If you're not hearing much about the dead Palestinians, then I don't have much respect for Canadian reporting. I've heard plenty about all the dead Hamas and civilians.

[jordanisonfire]

I don't follow this much. I thought this was started by the Israeli government kicking Palestinians out of their country (or rather treating them badly) to make way for Jews moving in there. Something like that. All I know is there's been a massive genocide there and that's about it.

[Nyx]

If you're not hearing much about the dead Palestinians, then I don't have much respect for Canadian reporting. I've heard plenty about all the dead Hamas and civilians.

Well I do hear about it, but it'll be something like 30minutes about 2 dead Israelis and then 2minutes about 300 dead palestinians and then right then it'll switch to something like "the palestinians are suicide bombing & they're terrorists <(last part implied obviously)" as if to excuse the deaths ><

[Rafael Domination]

(I mean, technically the Jews had it a long long time ago, but this is like saying that after I was evicted from my house, I've decided to come back and steal it from you some 500 years later; just doesn't compute).

Well, when put that way, it does sound stupid. But I'm not too sure about the word 'evicted'. This implies that the Jews were 'legally' forced out of their property a long time ago. From what I've heard, their lands were forcefully taken from them via war, and that is no different than what they're doing today. Ergo, while I don't support their method, the scenario in my mind isn't someone who was legitimately forced off their land illegitimately stealing it back. My scenario is: someone was forced out of his house, and now he's forcing his way back in. The 'forcing' part is wrong, yes, people have died and that sucks. But it does compute. Doesn't mean I support the killing, just so you know. :D

[Shaun]

Raff: I don't support any killing from any group either, but the problem is that neither group is being rational. A lot of Muslims (in that area) pretty much want to kill off all of Israel and wipe the jews off the face of the Earth and the Israeli Jews are perfectly willing to do the same thing in the name of defense.

It's all bloody, it's all complicated, and it's all pointless.

Nyx: If your news agencies are making a direct connection between Hamas and Palestine, then they are grossly misrepresenting the facts. Hamas may be made up of Palestinians, but it isn't a Palestinian organization, per se. They are part of the government, but generally speaking are quite separate, since they tend to do what they want rather than what the people or the government itself wants. They're kind of like a fringe group rather than representative of Palestine as a whole. Right now the people suffering the most are the Palestinians, but Israeli Jews don't seem to give a shit about that.

[Nyx]

Well, when put that way, it does sound stupid. But I'm not too sure about the word 'evicted'. This implies that the Jews were 'legally' forced out of their property a long time ago. From what I've heard, their lands were forcefully taken from them via war, and that is no different than what they're doing today. Ergo, while I don't support their method, the scenario in my mind isn't someone who was legitimately forced off their land illegitimately stealing it back. My scenario is: someone was forced out of his house, and now he's forcing his way back in. The 'forcing' part is wrong, yes, people have died and that sucks. But it does compute. Doesn't mean I support the killing, just so you know. :D

Actually, palestine was always the palestinians home. It was never the Israelis. It used to be a land that was home to muslims, jews & christians. But the Jews (I'm not talking about the average every-day people, more the politicians and such) decided that it was supposed to be their land according to their holybook (granted, so much for church & state). So they bought out some palestinian lands and their lands kept on getting bigger and bigger and eventually they sprouted their own country. Israel. The UN then declared that palestine could be parted in two, one Arab state and one Jewish. However then Israel claimed independence AND crosse the partition lines to make the land that already wasn't theirs bigger. There was also the Balfour declaration that approved the plan for a jewish homeland. You can read it at the bottom of this article : http://history1900s.about.com/cs/holocaust/p/balfourdeclare.htm (I didn't read the article I just wanted to link to the declaration)
The most ignored and important part of that declaration being: "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine"
Well they didn't stick to that. Nor did they stick to the land that they were allowed (be it, I don't even think that was right to start with.)

[eriko]

I don't understand why are we giving our comments on centuries old feud. I don't think any of us actually understand the gravity of the situation or is aware of the reality. But even then, if we all are giving comments, then let me state my views as well.

Both Jews and Muslims are radical. The Muslims will strike and if the Israelies don't retaliate, they will die or become slaves. And because of this the Israelis try to suppress and create fear to prevent any attack by the Muslim nations. And maybe if Israel was a muslim nation surrounded by Jewish states the situation would have been more or less the same.

Israel was created after the Jewish genocide during the Hitler's Aryan regime. And most of the Jews still feel that they are treated as outcasts by the the other sections and religions of the society.

Mumbai terror attack is such example. The jews were especially targetted. One person said, " I feel like a Jew." After the attack.

I don't think they really feel safe in any part of the Earth except Israel. If I would have been in their situation I would have done the same.

And somehow I feel that when an incident occurs at some place then the the counterparts of the victim arround the world agitate.

Ofcourse this incident/war should be condemned. But don't we all take advantage of our position even when it is not right to do so?

[Nyx]

I don't understand why are we giving our comments on centuries old feud. I don't think any of us actually understand the gravity of the situation or is aware of the reality. But even then, if we all are giving comments, then let me state my views as well.

The fact that it's an old war doesn't make it any less of an issue. These are 100s of people dying, and it's not right or humane to stand by and let it happen. Actually the reason I made this thread was in the hope that some people on here would just take a look, if not debate or participate in a discussion, and do their own research and become more aware of what's going on around them. Maybe take an action.


Both Jews and Muslims are radical. The Muslims will strike and if the Israelies don't retaliate, they will die or become slaves. And because of this the Israelis try to suppress and create fear to prevent any attack by the Muslim nations. And maybe if Israel was a muslim nation surrounded by Jewish states the situation would have been more or less the same.

But see, it's the other way around. It's the Israelies who took a strike and the Palestinians who are defending their rights or atleast trying to. The thing is, the "muslims" haven't striked yet, (out of self-defense that is), so you can't really call what the Israelis are doing retaliation. Israelis will become slaves? Now that's quite unlikely, that would only happen if they got rid of their military which would never happen. They can keep up their defence, but maybe they should get the hell out of the land that they have no right to. But since that'll probably never happen, they need to let the palestinians get they aid they badly need in what little of their land they have left.


Israel was created after the Jewish genocide during the Hitler's Aryan regime. And most of the Jews still feel that they are treated as outcasts by the the other sections and religions of the society.
I don't believe that the holocaust gives Jewish people the right to kick people out of their homes to create their own state. What is this, revenge? There was a Jewish genocide so now let's make a muslim one? I think we've all heard the eye for an eye expression...



I don't think they really feel safe in any part of the Earth except Israel. If I would have been in their situation I would have done the same.
So their safety depends on the death of their neighbouring states?
And I don't believe that's true. I have quite a few Jewish friends here in CANADA who are probably just as safe if not more here than Israel.

[Rafael Domination]

It's the Israelies who took a strike

Really? Tell that to the Egyptians, Syrians, etc, etc who decided to go on the offensive by attacking Israel during their holy holidays, when all their soldiers were on leave. Allah must have been furious at that dirty trick cuz' the Israelites somehow drove them all back.

Oh, and while you're at it, you can immediately dismiss the Iraqi president's claim of wiping Israel off the map. I doubt the Israelites are as extreme as that. I'd bet 35 years of my lifespan that once Israel reclaims all of the land promised to her patriarchs, they will immediately stop their little bashfest with the muslim world. That Iraqi madman, however, I doubt would stop until he had a bullet put between his eyes.

Again, I'm not supporting death and war here, but what I am saying is that the situation is not bully-versus-victim. Both sides are capable of committing atrocities, and both have suffered, not just the muslims, and not just the Israelites. Therefore, the blame is not to be unloaded on just Israel.

[Nyx]

Really? Tell that to the Egyptians, Syrians, etc, etc who decided to go on the offensive by attacking Israel during their holy holidays, when all their soldiers were on leave. Allah must have been furious at that dirty trick cuz' the Israelites somehow drove them all back.

Oh, and while you're at it, you can immediately dismiss the Iraqi president's claim of wiping Israel off the map. I doubt the Israelites are as extreme as that. I'd bet 35 years of my lifespan that once Israel reclaims all of the land promised to her patriarchs, they will immediately stop their little bashfest with the muslim world. That Iraqi madman, however, I doubt would stop until he had a bullet put between his eyes.

Again, I'm not supporting death and war here, but what I am saying is that the situation is not bully-versus-victim. Both sides are capable of committing atrocities, and both have suffered, not just the muslims, and not just the Israelites. Therefore, the blame is not to be unloaded on just Israel.

Israel took every aid palestine had, almost all it's land and stuck them in what? Like an eigth of their real land. It's self-defense to not sit there and wait until someone realizes that that's not their land. I'm not saying they have the right to violence, but if someone took my home away, bombed my family and stuck me in my backyard, I would not sit in my backyard and watch them live happily ever after in my house. If I had the chance to defend my home and take it back, you bet I would. And if they refuse to listen to me talking and I get my hands on a missile, you damn bet I would use it. Would you live the rest of your life, and watch your children and grand children live their lives, in that tiny portion of what's really yours? Live with no aid to the sick? Live in refuge camps? I wouldn't.

(Well it is bully vs victim. Just because the victim fights back doesn't make him a bully too, it just makes him a victim who's determined to not live the rest of his life as a victim

It would be bully vs bully if it was a fair fight (if they both had the same access to weapons) and if they were fighting over a land that could fairly be considered to belong to either of them. But it's not. It's the palestinians' land that the Israels have settlements in.

But you see, Israel has a lot of power in the world, and Palestine doesn't have much.Since september 2000 till now, atleast 1,062 Israelis and at least 4,876 palestinians have been killed. Not saying that this means the Palestinians are any nicer, it means they don't even have the requirements to defend themselves.

The fact that anything, anything at all, justifies someone holding people in refugee camps and denying them the medical aid and the food they need is bs. As long as we're human, nothing should ever justify that.)

[Shaun]

Really? Tell that to the Egyptians, Syrians, etc, etc who decided to go on the offensive by attacking Israel during their holy holidays, when all their soldiers were on leave. Allah must have been furious at that dirty trick cuz' the Israelites somehow drove them all back.

Oh, and while you're at it, you can immediately dismiss the Iraqi president's claim of wiping Israel off the map. I doubt the Israelites are as extreme as that. I'd bet 35 years of my lifespan that once Israel reclaims all of the land promised to her patriarchs, they will immediately stop their little bashfest with the muslim world. That Iraqi madman, however, I doubt would stop until he had a bullet put between his eyes.

Again, I'm not supporting death and war here, but what I am saying is that the situation is not bully-versus-victim. Both sides are capable of committing atrocities, and both have suffered, not just the muslims, and not just the Israelites. Therefore, the blame is not to be unloaded on just Israel.

Raff, this is exactly the mentality that has put the U.S. in the position it is in. Oh, well, Israel is cool, they can go murdering people all they want cause it's self defense. They'll stop when they get all the stuff they want.

The blame is to unloaded on JUST Israel in this instance. The fact is that Israelis have taken most of the Palestinian land right out of the hands of Palestinians. What do you really expect from a people that have been made into refugees on their own land? I don't agree with violence, but if you're being turned into subhumans by someone with all the guns, I guess I can't blame you for launching rockets at the enemy. The problem is that Israel is just fueling the fire right now. They're not making it any more likely that there will be peace with its neighbors; they're just pissing more people off, making more enemies, and ultimately sealing their own fate.

[eriko]

I don't trust the media or the U.S goverment. A month or so back I read in the newspaper in which Rice said Hamas is to be blamed for the war. And then yesterday I read Shaun's statement. Conclusion: You can't trust the media or the U.S governemnt even if Obama is the President. Nor would Israel like the U.S to intevene nor would any one else like it.

Very sorry Nyx. I am not that aquinted with this subject. As far India's media is concerned its main focus is Indo-Pak issues.

I really don't think we should be insensitive towards the genocide after all grudges are deep-seated and have long history. And as for Jews being safe in Canada. Then I suppose they are only safe in Canada, U.S and some european countries. But this states don't account for the whole of the world.

I have stated clearly that I condemn Israel actions. They are unjust and inhumane. But I seriously don't feel that the whole question is about land. I feel it is because of distrust and hatred. And emotions as strong as these cannot be wiped out in an instance. And then the politicians that are fuelling this lot. It is not about Ice cuts Ice and certainly not eye for an eye.

When the U.N has no control and nobody likes the U.S to intervene what do you really think you can do? In my opinion I can just sit and see what's happening as an outsider.

But I completey agree with Raffy
Again, I'm not supporting death and war here, but what I am saying is that the situation is not bully-versus-victim. Both sides are capable of committing atrocities, and both have suffered, not just the muslims, and not just the Israelites. Therefore, the blame is not to be unloaded on just Israel.

Maybe the Israelies are doing the bad thing and fuelling the war. But when both the sides are just as bad and just as good as each other and you know that the other side would have done the same thing if their places switched, I don't think any action can take place.

I have a solution let's pray. I am starting from today. Daily at night I am going to pray for the Palestine victims and maybe other people as well. I hope I do a good job since it would be the first time.:)

Side Note: Don't take the above seriously if you don't want to.

[Rafael Domination]

Raff, this is exactly the mentality that has put the U.S. in the position it is in. Oh, well, Israel is cool, they can go murdering people all they want cause it's self defense. They'll stop when they get all the stuff they want.

Ah, but I did not say that they were cool to do all that stuff. The only point I had in my last post was that both sides have suffered, and both sides have committed atrocities. It doesn't matter who did what, and when. Lives have been lost, and it sucks. I only quipped about Israel calming down once they get their 'house' back because the Israelites seem to have a more valid motive than just pure hatred. Unlike the president of Iraq. Now, I'm not saying their motive is valid enough to justify murder. I declare the person who pins that on me a dithering idiot. What I'm saying is, their motive isn't just pure hatred. That's all. Now, am I saying that the palestinians' motive is pure hatred? Again, no.

Now, my stance on Israel's claim to their land is: if God truly promised it to them, then THEY WILL have it. They wouldn't need to lift a finger. All they need to do is wait. The Old Testament is over. Nowadays, people don't always need to spill blood to get what they want, unlike what happened in the book of Joshua. I'd tell their leaders to look back to their Holy Scriptures where the story of Jacob and Esau is found in Genesis (cuz' they believe that story too). God promised Jacob the Inheritance of Isaac, something that belonged to his OLDER BROTHER, Esau. (Sound familiar?). Now what does Jacob go and do? He goes and steals it from his Big Bro. Now, Esau was an idiot to give let Jacob steal his Inheritance, but the point is, Jacob got something the wrong way. Bible scholars have stated that if Jacob hadn't done that, God would have given him the Inheritance of Isaac the right way (which way, I don't know). And guess what? That would have saved Jacob decades of running and living in fear from his older brother. It would have saved him a lot of suffering. And that's what Israel's doing today. If they truly believe that God promised them that land, they should just sit back and relax, and let God do the work. But what are they doing? Waging war. Again, my stance is: if they truly believe that the land is theirs, let God do the work in His own time. They don't need to cause so much suffering.

[Shaun]

So, we're basing this situation on a bunch of fairytales that have no basis in fact as there is absolutely no historical record that any of these people existed? The thing is, Raff, there's that whole bullcrap called "God works in mysterious ways." What if God, assuming he exists, wants them to fight for their land? Should they? What if God wants them to murder people and commit genocide for it? Should they? These people are clouded enough by religion as it is. I don't think they need to be following any religious advice at this point, because none of it is going to help them. The last time Jews sat by and took it up the ass they almost got wiped from the face of the Earth. There's no sitting around and waiting for God to make things happy on this planet. We have to make this world better on our own. This is one of my gripes with religion, that it relies on the will of God for things to get done. We really need to move away from that sort of nonsense and start doing things for the good rather than farting around hoping God will wave his magic wand and set things straight.

[Rafael Domination]

So you're saying Israel was right for waging war and causing the strife because they should stop believing in 'bullcrap' and take matters into their own hands? ^^

And you're mistaken if you think God's will is 'bullcrap'. Often a lot of people do unspeakable acts of horrors because they either twist it to their own greed or ignore it altogether. You're very mistaken if you're calling me clouded for believing in such a thing. And you're seriously mistaken if you think humans, of all creatures, can make things better on their own for this world. It might be remotely possible, and it may happen in bits. But on a whole, our species ain't so perfect. It's easy for you to sit there and call down some revival asking for humans to 'start doing things for the good'. We had thousands of years to try, yet here we are. Still squabbling like animals. Heck, animals don't fly planes into skyscrapers. You call my faith in God misplaced? Well here's news for you: your faith in humans - misplaced by miles, due to 6 billion bodies of hate, disregard and selfishness.

Now, if you even took the time to analyze my point, you would have understood that IF the Israelites had placed their faith in God's promise, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE WAGED A WAR TO RECLAIM THEIR LANDS IN THE FIRST PLACE and allowed God to work in due time. They would have waited. No one would have died. Do you think that course of action is worse than obliterating a few thousand lives? It would be a testament to stupidity, and I for one believe that a man of logic such as yourself wouldn't do so, if you chose the Israelites killing for their land over them waiting for it.

My stance: avoid the fighting and wait. This isn't The Old Testament anymore.

[Shaun]

So you're saying Israel was right for waging war and causing the strife because they should stop believing in 'bullcrap' and take matters into their own hands? ^^

No. If none of these people, Israeli Jews or Arabic Muslims, believed in the crap they believe in, then none of us would even be discussing this right now because it wouldn't be happening. There would be no Holy Land to bicker over.

And you're mistaken if you think God's will is 'bullcrap'. Often a lot of people do unspeakable acts of horrors because they either twist it to their own greed or ignore it altogether. You're very mistaken if you're calling me clouded for believing in such a thing. And you're seriously mistaken if you think humans, of all creatures, can make things better on their own for this world. It might be remotely possible, and it may happen in bits. But on a whole, our species ain't so perfect. It's easy for you to sit there and call down some revival asking for humans to 'start doing things for the good'. We had thousands of years to try, yet here we are. Still squabbling like animals. Heck, animals don't fly planes into skyscrapers. You call my faith in God misplaced? Well here's news for you: your faith in humans - misplaced by miles, due to 6 billion bodies of hate, disregard and selfishness.

Those thousands of years were years clouded by religion, not by our own wills. Those years were years of God or gods. We have yet to truly take matters into our own hands, but if you look at nations that are starting to do just that, shedding their religious coats, dropping their reliance on fantasies and nonsense, they become better nations, better peoples. The longer we stay chained to these sorts of ideas, the longer we prevent ourselves from becoming something better. Because right now we're not improving. Religion is clouding us, tearing us apart, piece by piece, nation by nation. The religious fly planes into skyscrapers. The religious cause Holy Wars, crusades. Without religion, this world would be a much better place, because so much of our hatreds and wars would never have happened. There would never have been Stalin's Purges or Hitlers Holocaust/WW2. There would not have been the dozen or so crusades and the dozens of other useless wars in the name of God. We wouldn't be denouncing science because a book written by people, full of stories stolen from other religions that we now laugh at, tells us that a magic being poofed us into existence and told us to do a lot of stuff.

My faith in humans is only misplaced because humans still cling to ancient, antiquated nonsense. When we are able to shed these things and become logical beings, then we will be better.

Now, if you even took the time to analyze my point, you would have understood that IF the Israelites had placed their faith in God's promise, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE WAGED A WAR TO RECLAIM THEIR LANDS IN THE FIRST PLACE and allowed God to work in due time. They would have waited. No one would have died. Do you think that course of action is worse than obliterating a few thousand lives? It would be a testament to stupidity, and I for one believe that a man of logic such as yourself wouldn't do so, if you chose the Israelites killing for their land over them waiting for it.

Jews don't believe in the New Testament. So, technically speaking, they are doing what God promised them in the manner that they believe is proper. You can sit here and say that this isn't the Old Testament anymore, but that's because YOU believe in the New Testament. They don't. They do not believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God and savior of mankind, etc. They believe things that are entirely contrary to what you believe in. This is not a nation of Christians, but a nation of radical Jews, two entirely different things.

And quite honestly, the Jews have been waiting. And you know what that earned them? A thousand years of torture, enslavement, and genocide by other religious people. Jews would likely have been wiped off the face of the Earth if they had just sat down and taken it.

As a man of logic, however, I think it's all nonsense, because if they didn't believe in the nonsense they believe in and the Muslims there didn't either, there wouldn't be any disagreement on the matter and nobody would be calling for the erradication of the other. There would be no Jews, no Muslims, no Christians, no nothing, no Holy Land. Only people.

[Rafael Domination]

No.

I'm relived.

Without religion, this world would be a much better place, because so much of our hatreds and wars would never have happened.

Umm...no. If people listened to 'thou shalt not kill', 'thou shalt not steal', 'thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself' and etc, the world would be a better place. You think Stalin did things in the name of religion? Nope. I'm not saying the Crusades weren't wrong. Heck, if I was God, I would have made those so called 'christians' lose the war. Raping muslims ain't the way to reclaim the Holy Land, y'know. Forget the cults and bloody warmongers masking themselves as religious figures. If people, oh big surprise here, did not twist religion to their own lusts or actually listened to what it was saying, a lot of stuff would have never happened. Now, you can pin accusations of such on others, but before you pin anything on true Christianity remember this: the Bible said itself: 'pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world'. I seriously doubt anyone living by that would cremate millions of people in giant ovens. Religion doesn't start wars. People start wars.

When we are able to shed these things and become logical beings, then we will be better.

When. Sounds nice. Unfortunately, we're both at a dead end here. The things in everyone will not listen to what God really wants (see above) and not everyone will simply 'shed' those things and become logical beings. It's in out DNA to behave like filth, regardless of religion or non-religion. There are a lot of atheist people out there. Do you think their murder statistics are lower than those who believe in 'thou shalt not kill?'. It's easy for both of us to say 'when' and 'if' this should happen. But the fact remains that out species is doomed to bash on itself, brother against brother.

This is not a nation of Christians, but a nation of radical Jews, two entirely different things.

Ah, so we do agree: they're not Christians. They believe they have the right to kill. I believe no one has the right to kill.

[Nyx]

I really don't think we should be insensitive towards the genocide after all grudges are deep-seated and have long history. And as for Jews being safe in Canada. Then I suppose they are only safe in Canada, U.S and some european countries. But this states don't account for the whole of the world.
Whose being insensitive? I'm very sorry that the genocide took place, I don't think anyone's happy about it, but the fact that it happened doesn't give anyone the right to kill others too.
So Jews aren't safe everywhere and that gives them the right to kill others and make their own land? Well guess what? Jews were safe in Palestine. Palestine WAS a peaceful land where Christians and Jews AND Muslims lived together. But yes, Jews were a minority. That didn't make them unsafe, it just made them a minority. But the creators of Israel were powerhungry and they weren;t happy being just a safe minority, they had to kill and take power. And that's just sick.



I have stated clearly that I condemn Israel actions. They are unjust and inhumane.
They ARE unjust and inhumane. They should be stopped. That's all that matters at this point.



When the U.N has no control and nobody likes the U.S to intervene what do you really think you can do? In my opinion I can just sit and see what's happening as an outsider.

And that's the mentality that's letting Israel get away with this. Of course there's more to do than just sit there, there always is. We can boycott Israeli products or brands that sponsor Israel so that they can't have all the military and weapons they have today. We can start protets. Want to go smaller? We can start educating our friends so that they know that this is unjust and they think about it and they spread the world. When the U.N sees that a majority of people REALLY care they will step up their work, they will do more.


Maybe the Israelies are doing the bad thing and fuelling the war. But when both the sides are just as bad and just as good as each other and you know that the other side would have done the same thing if their places switched, I don't think any action can take place.
That's just it, the sides aren't just as bad as each other. One is worst.
And actions can be taken AND should be taken. We don't live in a goddamn bubble, we need to see the rest of the world and help the victims as best as we can.



And you're seriously mistaken if you think humans, of all creatures, can make things better on their own for this world.
Really? SO we can't make things better? Then what's your plan Raff? Let's sit here and wait for God to rescue the poor palestinians? Or let's wait until God tell us to take action?
May God be real or not (though I believe his does exist), the God I belive in would not approve of humans sitting down and watching such horrors take place without stepping in.


Now, if you even took the time to analyze my point, you would have understood that IF the Israelites had placed their faith in God's promise, THEY WOULDN'T HAVE WAGED A WAR TO RECLAIM THEIR LANDS IN THE FIRST PLACE and allowed God to work in due time. They would have waited. No one would have died.

Yes, IF. But that's not what they did. They wouldn't have claimed the land lF they didn't believe in the holy land either or God or religion. But there's little point to discussing IFs and COULD HAVES right now. We need a solution, we need to help the hundreds dying everyday.

[Rafael Domination]

the God I belive in would not approve of humans sitting down and watching such horrors take place without stepping in.

Agreed. You're mistaken if the solution I was suggesting was to sit down and do nothing. I only stated my stance/opinion on the topic. I did not suggest a course of action because I feel I am incapable of doing so, and if I did, it might make things worse. I do take comfort, however, in that we both agree on one thing: war in real life sucks. Except in movies. That's fake.

[Nyx]

My mistake then. What does this mean then, though?

And you're seriously mistaken if you think humans, of all creatures, can make things better on their own for this world.

Sorry for jumping to conclusions.

[Rafael Domination]

That means that on their own, on average, humans are quite nasty as a species. When I meant 'world' I meant generally. As in, we are incapable of stopping ourselves, for the most part, from warring, stealing, hating each other in some way or form. I did NOT say, however, that humans aren't capable of doing good. Just by bringing this topic to light, Nyx, you've done a considerable amount of good by making us aware. That kind of 'good' exists, and we should try to do good. However, what I meant was that as a species, most humans just WON'T do good. What's worse that some of the 'good' we do, is actually quite evil, or people twist the good into evil.

Sorry if I had sounded like some nihilistic bastard. That's not what I meant. :D

[Diocletian]

And that's the mentality that's letting Israel get away with this. Of course there's more to do than just sit there, there always is. We can boycott Israeli products or brands that sponsor Israel so that they can't have all the military and weapons they have today.

Nyx, you are about as naive as they come. Boycotting brands and products? Do you know where Israel gets a huge amount of the money it needs to fight these wars? Hint: It doesn't do anything to earn it, but there's a country out there called the US that donates $3 billion dollars a year to fund Israeli weapons and military activity. And you are not going to change this.

We can start protets. Want to go smaller? We can start educating our friends so that they know that this is unjust and they think about it and they spread the world.

No, that's completely unfeasible, considering that all public schools (where the majority of people go) are controlled by the government, which is itself controlled by AIPAC and the like. They won't allow large-scale anti-Israeli protests.

Oh, and don't think you can broadcast your message through the news either. Because all major news outlets happen to be controlled by people who are very supportive of Israel's decisions.

When the U.N sees that a majority of people REALLY care they will step up their work, they will do more.

HA HA HA HA HA.

[Rafael Domination]

Ah, the UN. In Socials class, you have teachers raving about how the UN is US controlled. She would launch into these massive speeches about how the UN does absolutely nothing all the time. As to whether I agree or not, I will keep to myself. But I will say that such a powerful force has to act soon to prevent more horrors of war, because shame on the UN is they can't contain so small a conflict (small in size of geography, not hatred, mind you).

[Nyx]

Nyx, you are about as naive as they come.
Maybe (though I don't agree) But you're as pessimistic as they come. I'd rather be naive, atleast I'm trying to be humane.


Boycotting brands and products? Do you know where Israel gets a huge amount of the money it needs to fight these wars? Hint: It doesn't do anything to earn it, but there's a country out there called the US that donates $3 billion dollars a year to fund Israeli weapons and military activity. And you are not going to change this.


I know that the US gives huge amounts of money to Israel but that's not where ALL their money comes from. If people see what's WRONG here, then mabe the US will have to backout. Maybe it won't. If brands stop donating to Israel because they're losing sales and getting bad publicity, maybe Israel will become just a bit weaker. Maybe they won't. But it's a definite won't if no one tries. Atleast there's a chance of getting somewhere if people try.


No, that's completely unfeasible, considering that all public schools (where the majority of people go) are controlled by the government, which is itself controlled by AIPAC and the like. They won't allow large-scale anti-Israeli protests.

If the protests are large enough, maybe the won't be able to stop it. Even if they do, stopping something like that would take press. Not all news outlets can ignore it.


Oh, and don't think you can broadcast your message through the news either. Because all major news outlets happen to be controlled by people who are very supportive of Israel's decisions.


I know that. That's why I started this thread. If people aren't going to hear anything but propaganda then they should hear the truth somewhere.

[eriko]

Whatever I wanted to state Nyx, Dio has alredy stated. But let me add my account as well.

India has very good relations with Isreal. Do you really think the Indian goverment will legalise any protest against her? I think not.

Then comes educating my friends about it. Their reply: come on Eriko are crazy what good will you have in doing and saying anything? And besides you can't really do anything about it except debating and sulking.

Most of the people in India take Isreael in good light. This cannot be changed just by debating and trying to convince them at all.

And I again state my point that we are totally incapable of doing anything except critizing this. And everyone knows why because most of the powerful governments in the world support Isreal somehow or the other.

And all that crap about religion and all i don't beleive in it. Everybody knows that a Modern Jew will do anything to have what he thinks he has the right to. To Nyx: But sorry I can't buy your point that one side is worst. Maybe because of the present sitution it seems like it. But nevertheless I am not defending Isreal by stating the above. And I am repeating this again and again.

And about the genocide thing. What I meant by that was thay have hatred filled in them and they won't listen to anyone. This was not to justify their actions. You are just taking my words in a very wrong way Nyx. The question is: How do you think you can convince these people to stop.

I again condemn war and Isreal's actions.

But how do you know all this is true Nyx:
That didn't make them unsafe, it just made them a minority. But the creators of Israel were powerhungry and they weren;t happy being just a safe minority, they had to kill and take power. And that's just sick.
The majority could have been oppresive just like in case of Sri Lanka.

And again I condemn war and Isreal's actions.

[Rafael Domination]

So we all agree on one thing: war sucks. Right?

*Lemme be the first to pound on the disgusting, mentally-challenged vomit who encourages war anywhere out of a TV screen where the blood is really ketchup and the explosions are CGI*

[eriko]

So we all agree on one thing: war sucks. Right?
Ofcourse it sucks..well the question comes as Nyx put in: what do you we do now? And I say we are incapable.

[Shaun]

Umm...no. If people listened to 'thou shalt not kill', 'thou shalt not steal', 'thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself' and etc, the world would be a better place. You think Stalin did things in the name of religion? Nope. I'm not saying the Crusades weren't wrong. Heck, if I was God, I would have made those so called 'christians' lose the war. Raping muslims ain't the way to reclaim the Holy Land, y'know. Forget the cults and bloody warmongers masking themselves as religious figures. If people, oh big surprise here, did not twist religion to their own lusts or actually listened to what it was saying, a lot of stuff would have never happened. Now, you can pin accusations of such on others, but before you pin anything on true Christianity remember this: the Bible said itself: 'pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world'. I seriously doubt anyone living by that would cremate millions of people in giant ovens. Religion doesn't start wars. People start wars.

Hard to follow the rules of a God that doesn't follow those same rules.

Stalin did things in RESPONSE to religion. If without religion, he would have had nothing to respond against.

And of course if people actually FOLLOWED the GOOD things in the Bible this would be a better place, but unfortunately that hasn't happened in a significant way since Christianity's inception. And it never will happen.

And people create religion. So, people create religion, then wage wars in the name of their own creations, and so the circle completes itself.


When. Sounds nice. Unfortunately, we're both at a dead end here. The things in everyone will not listen to what God really wants (see above) and not everyone will simply 'shed' those things and become logical beings. It's in out DNA to behave like filth, regardless of religion or non-religion. There are a lot of atheist people out there. Do you think their murder statistics are lower than those who believe in 'thou shalt not kill?'. It's easy for both of us to say 'when' and 'if' this should happen. But the fact remains that out species is doomed to bash on itself, brother against brother.


How do you know what God really wants? What you think he wants isn't what someone else thinks he wants. There is no consensus among the religious on what is the right thing to do. You think you know, but you don't actually know, and what you think you know isn't what someone else thinks they know, and therefore none of it really matters at all. We can only base reality on what we actually know and can prove to be true. Since all religious people think their religion is the right one, it's really impossible to say whether your view of God is the right one, or the Israeli view of God is the right one, etc. It's all moot. It's all insanity.
And, actually, it's not in our DNA to act like filth. Culture creates indifference and hatred, or perhaps society would be better way to see it. We only began to see mass indifference when mankind began breeding more and creating large communities where people developed differences of opinion, such as on the matter of religion, and then got pissed off at each other for it, primarily because some people said they were right and others aid they were right, on and on. It's not really part of our DNA to be racists. It's primarily cultural with certain biological reactions that have little to do with those tendencies specifically, but more to do with a natural fear of the unknown, which extends to just about anything that scares the shit out of us. You see it in other species as well. We're naturally scared of snakes in certain parts of the world and not in others for a very speciic reason.

Ah, so we do agree: they're not Christians. They believe they have the right to kill. I believe no one has the right to kill.

I never disagreed on that fact. Jews aren't Christians. Never were.

What you believe and what others believe are different things and you telling other religious people that you're religious beliefs are true is just as absurd as the crazy religious people teling you they are right. Inevitably no religions are right. They're all wrong, they all get the details fudged up, and they all sacrifice logic for something that they know doesn't or can't exist to maintain a fantasy. We want there to be something more than us, because it allows us to forget that we have to be held responsible for the things we do that we know deep down are wrong. All of us do these things, whether they be small things (calling someone a fartface) or big things (committing genocide). Religion gives us the excuse or the means of getting away from it rather than facing the consequences for reality. We can instead face those consequences in an imaginary plane of existence that nobody can say for certain exists. We simply want there to be more. Always have and probably always will so long as we forego our logical imperative.

[Nyx]

India has very good relations with Isreal. Do you really think the Indian goverment will legalise any protest against her? I think not.

Just because it's not legal doesn't mean you can't do it...People have done protests against the government's will before. But we're a little young for that.


Then comes educating my friends about it. Their reply: come on Eriko are crazy what good will you have in doing and saying anything? And besides you can't really do anything about it except debating and sulking.

Really? Have you tried? What good will you have? You'll stay human. It's inhumane to not even acknowledge this horror and to stand by and do nothing.


Most of the people in India take Isreael in good light. This cannot be changed just by debating and trying to convince them at all.

YES it can. Didn't Ghandi change alot by just discussion? By actions that didn't involve violence?


And I again state my point that we are totally incapable of doing anything except critizing this. And everyone knows why because most of the powerful governments in the world support Isreal somehow or the other.

We ARE NOT incapable. That is just what they want us to think.
Have you read the book 1984? I suggest you do, because that's exactly where we're headed.
If we don't do SOMETHING, ANYTHING now, soon it'll be our countries. Do you really think powerhungry governments stop with one war won? Just one victory? Of course not.
When they see that people are willing to put aside compassion and their humanity for their sake of their own luxury, then they'll see that they can do whatever they want and they'll get away with it. If you can't just do it for someone else fine, but are we going to wait till it's OUR country and then we'll realize that OOPS should've done something, well too late.


To Nyx: But sorry I can't buy your point that one side is worst. Maybe because of the present sitution it seems like it. But nevertheless I am not defending Isreal by stating the above. And I am repeating this again and again.

No, it seems like it by the present PROPAGANDA. Do your research. You may not be defending them, but you sure as hell aren't condeming them either.


And about the genocide thing. What I meant by that was thay have hatred filled in them and they won't listen to anyone. This was not to justify their actions. You are just taking my words in a very wrong way Nyx. The question is: How do you think you can convince these people to stop.

Sorry, I didn't understand that.
I don't know, I honestly don't right now. This is what's hunting me 24/7(LITERALLY). I have not been able to think of anything else for the past few weeks (which is little time, I know). But that's why I made this thread. Atleast to get word out. Maybe to get some ideas.



I again condemn war and Isreal's actions.

To condemn is to EXPRESS strong disapproval. If you're not willing to express it, openly like as to friends, then you're not condemning. And I know it's hard. I know some friends don't even hear you when you say something about this stuff, because i'm still trying. And I'm sorry if I come off as judgemntal. You have every right (AS YOU KNOW ;]) to handle this whatever way you like and whatever way is best for you. What my beliefs may lead me to do are just that of my beliefs and I don't want to come of as pushy. But I can't go to sleep without knowing: I tried to tell everyone who didn't see it.

I know ANYONE can do something about this. I don't know how yet, may it sound ridiculous or as of course dear Dio would put it: naive. But I know it and one day, I hope, I'll be able to make you see that too.

[Rafael Domination]

Hard to follow the rules of a God that doesn't follow those same rules.

Oh, quit riding that massively high horse of yours. Of course he follows his own rules. You're here right now, aren't you. Besides, those rules are for US, not Him. Got a problem with that? Tough. It's 'harder' for something so finite to bash on someone so infinite. Comments like these don't bring people one inch closer to logic: all it does is convey a huge dollop of pride.

Stalin did things in RESPONSE to religion. If without religion, he would have had nothing to respond against.

He still made the choice to respond to them anyway. He's the one to blame. Human. Not religion. It's like you responding to my posts. You're very well capable of ignoring me, but guess what, it's not gonna happen. Therefor the one who makes the choice is the one responsible for his or her actions. You can't pin anything on me for 'making' you respond, just as you can't pin anything on religion for 'making' such a madman respond.

And people create religion. So, people create religion, then wage wars in the name of their own creations, and so the circle completes itself.

You've pretty much just proved a point of mine. People create their own idiotic cults and then wage war using 'god' as a mask. Again, people's faults. If they would just listen to the rules meant for them, they wouldn't be using religion as an excuse for hatred. There's no other way to look at it. Gun's don't kill people. Leave a sawn-off sitting inside your closet and I doubt anyone's heads will be blown off. It will be someone who used that gun in the wrong way to murder another human being when an incident happens.

But, back to the topic: as for Israel vs. Palestine, what solutions do you guys think should be placed into effect by the UN?

[Shaun]

Oh, quit riding that massively high horse of yours. Of course he follows his own rules. You're here right now, aren't you. Besides, those rules are for US, not Him. Got a problem with that? Tough. It's 'harder' for something so finite to bash on someone so infinite. Comments like these don't bring people one inch closer to logic: all it does is convey a huge dollop of pride.

My existence doesn't depend on God because I don't believe in God. And technically, no he doesn't. He makes rules and then he breaks them because he's God and God can do anything he wants. If he says Thou Shalt Not Kill, that doesn't apply to him cause he's God. Real fair.

And God isn't infinite. You can trace the moment in which he came into being in human history. Before there was God, there were gods, and before that there were forces that primitive man didn't understand. Before that, there wasn't much at all. Mankind has fabricated these things throughout history in response to the unknown.

He still made the choice to respond to them anyway. He's the one to blame. Human. Not religion. It's like you responding to my posts. You're very well capable of ignoring me, but guess what, it's not gonna happen. Therefor the one who makes the choice is the one responsible for his or her actions. You can't pin anything on me for 'making' you respond, just as you can't pin anything on religion for 'making' such a madman respond.

I like arguing with religious people, hence why I'm still here. And it's irrelevant what choices Stalin made; he never would have made those choices if religion hadn't been there in the first place. His response was to create his own religion.

And you're using an analogy that doesn't work. A human responding to a human is not the same as a human responding to an inhuman stimulus. Religion is not a human being; it is an inhuman construct. Therefore, responding to religion is not the same as responding to another human being. Responding to religion is more closely associated with responding to thirst or hunger. You can pin plenty of things in religion and you can pin plenty of things on human beings. Both are terrifying things, one of which was actually invented by the other, which is quite fitting. Flawed human creates God, flawed human uses God to make excuses for his or her flaws, and flawed human doesn't face the consequences of that invention because flawed human can circumvent responsibility by invoking the created God. Wonderful.

You've pretty much just proved a point of mine. People create their own idiotic cults and then wage war using 'god' as a mask. Again, people's faults. If they would just listen to the rules meant for them, they wouldn't be using religion as an excuse for hatred. There's no other way to look at it. Gun's don't kill people. Leave a sawn-off sitting inside your closet and I doubt anyone's heads will be blown off. It will be someone who used that gun in the wrong way to murder another human being when an incident happens.

And to them, you're part of your own idiotic cult. The problem is that there are no actual rules meant for them. Man invented religion and then splintered, all disagreeing, all fighting against one another whether aggressively or passively. You call them cults, but your religion is no different from theres when looked through a different lens. To yourselves, everyone is a cult, because none of you agree and all of you interpret things how you think is the proper way. But unlike science, there is no consensus amongst the religious. No two religions believe in exactly the same thing. It's awfully arrogant to assume that you know the true rules meant for them, because in reality you don't know. You think you know, just as all of them think they know. Every religious person thinks they have the right religion. If you didn't think that, you wouldn't be in that religion.

I don't believe any of it because there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that any of it is actually true.

But, back to the topic: as for Israel vs. Palestine, what solutions do you guys think should be placed into effect by the UN?

The UN has no power, so anything they did wouldn't work anyway. It's just there to look pretty, not to actually be of use. The last time the UN actually did something useful was...umm...never. The only nations in there that really have any backbone are the ones everyone hates. Why? Because when you look at the U.S. you realize that we're aggressive and pre-emptive, which is bad in some ways and good in others. Most members of the UN like to talk and talk and talk, getting little to nothing done. Look at Darfur. What did the UN do? They talked about it. That's it. Maybe set up some refugee camps or some crap. But as far as stopping the folks killing off all those people? Nope, not a thing.

[Nyx]

exactly, if the UN can't do anything right now then we ( I mean every indivual) should try to help.

[Shaun]

Well, it looks like it won't matter now, because apparently a cease fire has been called on both sides and Israel is leaving.

[Nyx]

Yea just read that now. I really wonder what they're playing at...

Either way, I'm glad palestine is finally getting some aid. 1,300 palestinians have died and 13 Israelis have died since Dec 27.

[Shaun]

A heck of a lot of pressure from Egypt and everyone else probably had something to do with it.

[Nyx]

Maybe.
But I think this is all to see if palestinians or Hamas will take just Gaza and that'll be enough for them, or if they're going to keep fighting for ALL their land.
Either way, it's a win-win for Israel. If they agree on just having the Gaza strip then Israel has more than the land that it legally owns. If they decided to keep fighting, well then Israel can just label all palestinians terrorists and roll on the killing.

[Rafael Domination]

If he says Thou Shalt Not Kill, that doesn't apply to him cause he's God. Real fair.

You do realize that IS fair.

And you're using an analogy that doesn't work.

Incorrect. The point was, he still had a choice. That fact is set in steel, and no amount of word twisting can get rid of that.

I like arguing with religious people, hence why I'm still here.

And I love straightening out all of your misconceptions. That's why I'm still here. For now.

all fighting against one another whether aggressively or passively.

Again, thanks for proving my point. It's still man's fault. And I doubt it's arrogance to assume that the 'thou shalt not kill' law applies for all. That is a moral truth that sets us apart, for the most part, from mere animals. We do not kill other humans not because our survival depends on it, but because it is wrong as a whole.

Either way, it's a win-win for Israel. If they agree on just having the Gaza strip then Israel has more than the land that it legally owns. If they decided to keep fighting, well then Israel can just label all palestinians terrorists and roll on the killing.

I doubt it will end at that.

Anyways, since the situation has temporarily resolved, I believe I'm done with this debate. If you wanna keep bickering about religious principles, which will only serve to deviate from this urgent topic, Shaun, be my guest. You started it. I shall end it, on my side.

*I shall miss the mind sparring for a whole, year, though.*

[eriko]

Listen Nyx carefully. I reall don't think you are being pushy right here. You are obviously stating what is right and should be protested against. And this is why I am very grateful to you for starting this thread because I am able to know about something that I might have not bothered about at all.

Let me put it very frankly you are very corect when you say that I am not really condemning Isreal's actions as I should be. I accept this but I don't regret or repent. I have my reasons. I am pretty much sure you are not aware that I account for only 20% of my country's population who is priveleged and goes to a English Medium school and has the access to Internet and news. This is a hard fact about my country. India may seem like a cool good nation ofcourse we are biggest democracy. But the reality is we are hungry, illiterate, over populated, it is not multiculture as anybody would put it as it is agriculture. Just like as you say this Palestineis 24/7 on your mind and so is India's problem on my mind. And not just mine on every educated Indian (proper educated Indian is less that even 20%).

And how does Isreal connect to this; well there are no products comming in for Isreal I tell you. I should have known if they woyld have been there in the market. Maybe some chocolates but they are too expensive. Indian government is involved in big military transactions with Isreal. I as an Indian has always felt and will feel that my country's security and my people's security is of main importance to me than anybody else.

You must understand that I am not as liberal as you, maybe to think and also symphathise, but not act on a global issues. Simply because charity begins at home. And I would discourage anybody from protesting against Isreal not because I approve of them (I have clearly staed I condemn war and Isreal's actions but because there is so much to be done in India itself to raise the living standard of poor.

Now you will point finger at me and say that is small petty issues such as not having proper infratructure in my country more important that hundered people dieing in both Isreal and Gaza (especially in Gaza I must add). First of all this is not the just about proper infratructure. According to U.N 35% of my counttry's population is below poverty line. But let me not divert you.

Right now India has waged a was against terrorism. India has banned Pakistani news channels and papers. All trade with Pakistan has been stopped. According to the Indian militrary both contries have moved forces to the borders. It's like as if both countries are ready for war (pl God forbid this from taking place). But nevertheless speculations have been encircling. And then the Taliban issue. I might as well add Taliban has offered 500 suicide bombers to aid Pakistan army. And do you know what: this CREEPS ME OUT.

All I really want to do is support my country's government, no matter what, and then we are dependent on Isreal for military aid.
--------------------------------------
Not only India but many other South Asian counties nationals will take no action. Why:
Pakistan: they are involved with India
Myanmar: Military rule
Sri Lanka: Government trying to drive out the Tamils
China: No real democracy people are fighting for more rights
Maldives: doing all it can before it drowns in the Indian Ocean
Bangladesh: No stable government, always involved in cheating and fraud
Thailand: we all know what happened it was all in news
Nepal: just drove out monarchial rule
------------------------------------

Every national of the above mentioned country will only think of their country. We all are underdeveloped struggling with our pasts fighting each other.

-----------------------------------------
Challenges faced:
1. can't convince Isreal to stop
2. you can indulge people in discussions, gain their symphathises but can you drive them to action

--------------------------------------
Even then there is a solution: Debating on this forum will not work. We need to do something on large is scale. (All of us who are concerned by this.) We need to do something on large scale. Develop a blog or website. Promote it. Gain public opinion. Hold debates and discussions. Post real life stories. Speak agaist war. And this way we will work unitedly as people of the work. And then I will not have to worry about my country and my responsibility towards her. This is the only way. i ahev someideas but this first needs to be approved. And let nyx guide this; since she is the most concerned. This is just an Idea which might work. And maybe this is better than just praying.:)

-----------------------
As for my discussing with my friend I have my exams going. Nobody will be intrested and besided I really don't have time to pick up the phone and call them. And beside we need like-minded people who are actually concerned and not my friends who will listen to me, approve of what I say, and then forget about. But ofcourse I will make sure that Gaza-Isreal come to their notice when we next meet.
-------------------------
To Raffy and Shaun: all your talks about religion is driving me crazy. Not all religions are bad. Oh! forget it.:mad:

[Rafael Domination]

To Raffy and Shaun: all your talks about religion is driving me crazy. Not all religions are bad. Oh! forget it.

And since I don't want to drive you batty, my dear, I was the first to step back. ^^

[Shaun]

Now you will point finger at me and say that is small petty issues such as not having proper infratructure in my country more important that hundered people dieing in both Isreal and Gaza (especially in Gaza I must add). First of all this is not the just about proper infratructure. According to U.N 35% of my counttry's population is below poverty line. But let me not divert you.

35%? That's it? What constitutes the poverty line according to the U.N.?

Also, point of fact, anyone who thinks they can reduce poverty by any significant margin is actually being ignorant and stupid. Poverty doesn't actually go away. It's impossible to rid the world of poverty. All you can do is raise the standard of living. People have been bitching about poverty for longer than most countries today have been around. The U.S. still has poverty; socialist countries that happen to be doing quite well still have poverty; etc. It doesn't go away. The only thing that changes is the standard of living, but once that becomes common place, people start bitching about poverty again.

Right now India has waged a was against terrorism. India has banned Pakistani news channels and papers. All trade with Pakistan has been stopped. According to the Indian militrary both contries have moved forces to the borders. It's like as if both countries are ready for war (pl God forbid this from taking place). But nevertheless speculations have been encircling. And then the Taliban issue. I might as well add Taliban has offered 500 suicide bombers to aid Pakistan army. And do you know what: this CREEPS ME OUT.

Terrible stuff this. Happening all over the place and unfortunately too many countries are unwilling to do anything about it and when the U.S. does anything they become the bad guys.

China: No real democracy people are fighting for more rights

The people of China don't technically have any rights, as demonstrated by what the Chinese were willing to do to paint a pretty picture of their newly industrialized nation. If you don't conform to the Communist Image, you are dealt with.
China's government is so corrupt it makes all the corruption in the U.S. government look like little children trying to cheat at dominoes.

Most of the nations you've mentioned suffer from the impacts of postcolonialism, particularly India. They don't know how to govern themselves (India has a problem with population, just like China, which makes governing incredibly difficult indeed), they constantly shift power from one bad group to another, etc. This is what happens when colonialism is not allowed to slowly pull itself out of the world (of course, if colonialism had never happened, that would be better).

2. you can indulge people in discussions, gain their symphathises but can you drive them to action

Yes, actually, you can drive a lot of people to action and often times it doesn't take violence. Plenty of people have done this in corrupt or struggling nations. It's proven that it can work, but often times people are generally complacent with whatever is happening in the now. They're willing to accept the bad in exchange for not having to worry about what would happen if it changed.

Even then there is a solution: Debating on this forum will not work. We need to do something on large is scale. (All of us who are concerned by this.) We need to do something on large scale. Develop a blog or website. Promote it. Gain public opinion. Hold debates and discussions. Post real life stories. Speak agaist war. And this way we will work unitedly as people of the work. And then I will not have to worry about my country and my responsibility towards her. This is the only way. i ahev someideas but this first needs to be approved. And let nyx guide this; since she is the most concerned. This is just an Idea which might work. And maybe this is better than just praying.:)

You underestimate the power of the Internet.

To Raffy and Shaun: all your talks about religion is driving me crazy. Not all religions are bad. Oh! forget it.:mad:

Well, you're from India, which means the majority of your people are of Hindu persuasion, which I'm not too familiar with as far as its history is concerned. Perhaps Hinduism is the one exception to the rule...

[Shaun]

And since I don't want to drive you batty, my dear, I was the first to step back. ^^

Unfortunately for you, Raff, I never back down :P.

[Nyx]

Now you will point finger at me and say that is small petty issues such as not having proper infratructure in my country more important that hundered people dieing in both Isreal and Gaza (especially in Gaza I must add).
Ouch. That's kind of a harsh judgment isn't it?
Of course it's more than understandable that you would put your country first. And I would not tell you that your country's issues are petty.
There's no way I could, or would, tell you that other country's problems should be put before others when they are anything but small.
But whilst you think of your country, and how you say it depends on Israel for military aid, please realise (and if you already do then great) that all these problems in the world are closely connected. Really, just considering the problems, being one more person that isn't overlooking it is already taking an action.
And everyone must only do what they have, in their current situation, the power to do.
A passionate journalist who is being well funded (okay lame example but I'm trying) will obviously have the power to do more to help, and I realise that most of us are still kids/teens, and some of us are teens in countries that need our concern now and so if all we can do for now is to become aware and educate ourselves about the problem to the best of our ability then that is already a huge and much appreciated action.









Challenges faced:
1. can't convince Isreal to stop
2. you can indulge people in discussions, gain their symphathises but can you drive them to action

--------------------------------------

The challenge is not so much to get their sympathy but to get them to educate themselves, to learn more about the crisis and to inform others. A big part of the problem is that people DON"T know. It's alot easier for someone to get away with a crime when no one knows or cares. If 100 people hear about this and just one is passionate about it then the chain will continue and I know that the goal will be achieved.

=]

Even if say 5 members look at this thread, these are 5 members that'll go and read something quick about it or watch a vid or talk to a parent and become aware of a problem they had never considered.

That's a start.

I don't think I for one, I don't about anyone else, am ready to tell people about this on a large scale. I have a lot of educating myself to go through before I have a firm stance on the topic.


As for my discussing with my friend I have my exams going. Nobody will be intrested and besided I really don't have time to pick up the phone and call them. And beside we need like-minded people who are actually concerned and not my friends who will listen to me, approve of what I say, and then forget about. But ofcourse I will make sure that Gaza-Isreal come to their notice when we next meet.

That is amazing of you to do. =]

I have to say, I am finidng it impossible to get through to my friends. It's hard to tell people something sad because no one wants to hear it. Someone who I did manage to get through to suggested I go at it differently. Since my first goal is to get people to boycott the major companies that give the biggest donations to Israel, she suggested I try just putting down the brand down without even mentioning the political aspect. It seems... odd but I think I'll try it. She also said something like "the players in this game are smart so you gotta play as smart as them" ;] And so, we'll see.

[Rafael Domination]

Unfortunately for you, Raff, I never back down :P.

The attribute of a strong leader. Like I haven't noticed. Still, some battles are won in retreat. I've stated my points, and there's no need for me to argue with you any more. This is about Israel and Palestine, not us.


I'll miss the intense debate, though :P

[Shaun]

Well, I was correct, so it is only logical for you to back down. Just like Israel. Israel shouldn't have started things, and you shouldn't have either. Now I've firmly brought the both of us into the fray of the Israel/Palestine debate!

[eriko]

And since I don't want to drive you batty, my dear, I was the first to step back. ^^

I appreciate the gesture sweetheart.:P

35%? That's it? What constitutes the poverty line according to the U.N.?
that it! you are saying that's it. considering the size of my country's population 35%is really something

Also, point of fact, anyone who thinks they can reduce poverty by any significant margin is actually being ignorant and stupid. Poverty doesn't actually go away. It's impossible to rid the world of poverty. All you can do is raise the standard of living. People have been bitching about poverty for longer than most countries today have been around. The U.S. still has poverty; socialist countries that happen to be doing quite well still have poverty; etc. It doesn't go away. The only thing that changes is the standard of living, but once that becomes common place, people start bitching about poverty again.
In the U.S people don't die because of hunger.



Terrible stuff this. Happening all over the place and unfortunately too many countries are unwilling to do anything about it and when the U.S. does anything they become the bad guys.
NObody likes U.S to interfere. Countries would have listened to U.N if it would have been more transparent. I would never like U.S to step into my country. I don't know what you think of your governemnt. But Indians (most of us) don't approve of their actions. U.S has always followed perefrential policies.


Yes, actually, you can drive a lot of people to action and often times it doesn't take violence. Plenty of people have done this in corrupt or struggling nations. It's proven that it can work, but often times people are generally complacent with whatever is happening in the now. They're willing to accept the bad in exchange for not having to worry about what would happen if it changed.

I don't think how? And don't you give me the example of Gandhi. Most Indians believe that non-violence is no way of fighting oppression. And maybe we would have got our freedom quite sooner if not for him. He was a reformer I respect him for that but not a freedom fighter.

You underestimate the power of the Internet.
I don't know much about the internet I agree. But then I feel I too am quite small to do anything on large scale.

Well, you're from India, which means the majority of your people are of Hindu persuasion, which I'm not too familiar with as far as its history is concerned. Perhaps Hinduism is the one exception to the rule...
Our history is not aginst us. And technically speaking we are very tolerant as well. In 50,000 years of Hinduism history we have not ruled or colonised any country. Anyways even then I take back what I said since times are changing. Soon something dramatic is going to happen. maybe for the first time since 50,000 years.

Ouch. That's kind of a harsh judgment isn't it?
Sorry about that.

I don't think I for one, I don't about anyone else, am ready to tell people about this on a large scale. I have a lot of educating myself to go through before I have a firm stance on the topic.
Wise decision.

That is amazing of you to do. =]
Sorry for being judgemental. But is this a sarcastic remark? I hope not.

[Shaun]

that it! you are saying that's it. considering the size of my country's population 35%is really something

Only if you consider it by population, but that's really quite absurd. Would it suddenly be better if India were a nation of 100 people? Or 1,000? Or 100,000,000? America has close to 35% itself, yet we're only a nation of 300,000,000 (well, closer to 316,000,000, supposedly). I don't see why the size of the nation matters so drastically in this instance. Sure, it's bad that so many people are in poverty, but at the same time, that's not that unusual of a percentage and it's only worsened when you consider it by the population. The sad truth is that your poverty level likely won't change drastically, even if India gets its act together.

In the U.S people don't die because of hunger.

Yes, actually, they do. Edward Said talked about something he called Orientalism and how often times the West sort of created these fanciful imaginings of places like India or Asia, making them seem like a dream rather than something with good and bad sides (we see this still in the movies). Well, I suspect that same concept extends the other direction where nations of the Orient (India, China, etc.) have this magical view of places like America where the U.S. is this perfect wonderland where nobody starves and nobody is poor. The honest truth is that we have as many problems as anyone else, they're just not as pronounced. Most of the time you don't hear about people starving to death, parents who can barely feed their children, lack of education for the lowest classes, etc. All of these things exist in the United States. The only major difference between the U.S. and other nations with these problems at a more pronounced level (well, at least a significant difference) is that, in general, the standard of living in the U.S. is higher than most nations. But people still suffer and die here needlessly. This is why I'm against government unloading of massive funds to charity programs internationally, because it seems highly illogical to send all this money to try to fix problems that can't be fixed with just money anyway, rather than taking that money to fix our own problems.

NObody likes U.S to interfere. Countries would have listened to U.N if it would have been more transparent. I would never like U.S to step into my country. I don't know what you think of your governemnt. But Indians (most of us) don't approve of their actions. U.S has always followed perefrential policies.

No, you had England do the stepping for you and thankfully that's all over with.
And of course you don't like us. Nobody does anymore. We can thank our moronic president for that.

I don't think how? And don't you give me the example of Gandhi. Most Indians believe that non-violence is no way of fighting oppression. And maybe we would have got our freedom quite sooner if not for him. He was a reformer I respect him for that but not a freedom fighter.

All examples of nations that continued to solve matters violently rather than using less violent means have dissolved into various forms of chaos. Every single one. Look at Africa. Constant violence in some of the nations there, and all of them are poor, not improving, constantly shifting power, constantly killing one another, never talking, and getting absolutely nothing done that is useful to anyone there. Violence has its limits. Revolution may occur, but once that has run its course, it's best to cease the fighting and find diplomatic solutions. The problem with the Middle East is that it has been fighting, well, everyone for so long now I don't think that most of its people know how to stop.
My suggestion to Indians is to stop having so many damned kids and start solving problems. Indians have one of the highest birth rates in the world, last I checked, and for a nation that is having so many problems feeding itself, governing itself, etc. it seems illogical to have families of 3 or 4 or 10 kids.
If most Indians believe that violence is the only solution, then they will seal their own fate. Mass death is never a good solution to any problem.

I don't know much about the internet I agree. But then I feel I too am quite small to do anything on large scale.

Everyone starts small. Nobody is born great.

Our history is not aginst us. And technically speaking we are very tolerant as well. In 50,000 years of Hinduism history we have not ruled or colonised any country. Anyways even then I take back what I said since times are changing. Soon something dramatic is going to happen. maybe for the first time since 50,000 years.

I'll take your word for it. I don't know much about it.

[Rafael Domination]

Well, I was correct, so it is only logical for you to back down. Just like Israel. Israel shouldn't have started things, and you shouldn't have either. Now I've firmly brought the both of us into the fray of the Israel/Palestine debate!


*opens mouth to preach down fire and brimstone. Thinks again of how this'll just end in another pointless volley of words. Closes mouth*




By the way, you haven't posted a profile of what you wanted to look like in the YWO portrait.

[Shaun]

I know. I intentionally left it open because I want you to just make it up. I don't care how I look like. I think you should be creative with it. It's funnier when I don't know what to expect :). Just like last time with the flash thing you did.

[eriko]

Only if you consider it by population, but that's really quite absurd. Would it suddenly be better if India were a nation of 100 people? Or 1,000? Or 100,000,000? America has close to 35% itself, yet we're only a nation of 300,000,000 (well, closer to 316,000,000, supposedly). I don't see why the size of the nation matters so drastically in this instance. Sure, it's bad that so many people are in poverty, but at the same time, that's not that unusual of a percentage and it's only worsened when you consider it by the population. The sad truth is that your poverty level likely won't change drastically, even if India gets its act together.
I understand what you mean but should not we be optimistic about it? Like this it seems as if you are telling me that Indians should forget and do nothing.

But people still suffer and die here needlessly. This is why I'm against government unloading of massive funds to charity programs internationally, because it seems highly illogical to send all this money to try to fix problems that can't be fixed with just money anyway, rather than taking that money to fix our own problems.
Okay this was a shock. But I understand your point.


No, you had England do the stepping for you and thankfully that's all over with.
And of course you don't like us. Nobody does anymore. We can thank our moronic president for that.
U.S has always been like that. Bush just took it a little further. And I might as well add: politically and economically India is not that enthusiastic about Obama as well.

All examples of nations that continued to solve matters violently rather than using less violent means have dissolved into various forms of chaos. Every single one. Look at Africa
This was not what I meant. Its is not like we Indians have started believing in violence and stuff. I just wanted to say too much of non-violence is not good as well. We should strike a balance.
My suggestion to Indians is to stop having so many damned kids and start solving problems. Indians have one of the highest birth rates in the world, last I checked, and for a nation that is having so many problems feeding itself, governing itself, etc. it seems illogical to have families of 3 or 4 or 10 kids.
Being the biggest democracy and having the worst politicians this is totally impossible. They never come up with strict laws and all they care about is their vote-bank. This sucks.

If most Indians believe that violence is the only solution, then they will seal their own fate. Mass death is never a good solution to any problem.
I need to correct myself here. Not all Indian believe in violence. Actually only some of us (including me) believe that, sorry about what I am going to state: English were too shameless to be driven out of our country only by non-violence. The main reason why they left was international pressure and nothing else. I mean this was the main factor. Next comes internal revolts by the Indian people in the British Army. The third point were increasing revolutionary activities in India at that time. I just want the people to understand (not only Indians others as well) that they should not give credit to Gandhi for driving out the British. Because of this idealism, sacrifices of the people who actually gave their life for India is overshadowed.

Gandhi was a reformer. His contribution to India is great. He unified India and hence according to me he should be remembered as a reformer in world history.

I'll take your word for it. I don't know much about it.
Don't count on it. I have already stated that times have changed. Our history is clean but I don't think our future will be.

[Diocletian]

All examples of nations that continued to solve matters violently rather than using less violent means have dissolved into various forms of chaos. Every single one. Look at Africa. Constant violence in some of the nations there, and all of them are poor, not improving, constantly shifting power, constantly killing one another, never talking, and getting absolutely nothing done that is useful to anyone there. Violence has its limits. Revolution may occur, but once that has run its course, it's best to cease the fighting and find diplomatic solutions. The problem with the Middle East is that it has been fighting, well, everyone for so long now I don't think that most of its people know how to stop.

Have you forgotten World War II? Once the war began, there was basically absolutely no diplomacy - the Allies demanded unconditional surrender and got it due to massive violence and nothing else, and the world seems to be significantly better off because of it. Sometimes you need an overload of violence to solve problems and to shake some sense into people's heads.

My suggestion to Indians is to stop having so many damned kids and start solving problems. Indians have one of the highest birth rates in the world, last I checked, and for a nation that is having so many problems feeding itself, governing itself, etc. it seems illogical to have families of 3 or 4 or 10 kids.

Right, because the average impovrished Indian cares about the state of the national economy, long-term problems and solutions, India's status in the world, etc. :rolleyes: Please. People in poverty are concerned with struggling to put food in their children's mouths each day and no-one can blame them for not thinking of such cosmopolitan matters when they hover close to death by starvation constantly. It's the poor locked in grinding poverty who have the most children and telling them to get their act together and "stop having so many damned kids" is about the most ignorant thing I've heard from anyone on this thread so far.

And the Indian government is equally stuck because it functions as a democracy (a startlingly effective one for such a large country, actually) and thus cannot impose such totalitarian controls as countries like China have done. There's no solution unless there's a massive international effort of education about contraception and the like.

If most Indians believe that violence is the only solution, then they will seal their own fate. Mass death is never a good solution to any problem.

No, actually, mass death can be a very effective solution. People as far back as Alexander the Great knew that by razing cities to the ground, they could ensure long-term peace because other cities would be too intimidated to resist. The Americans did the same thing by slapping some sense into Japan's head with the atomic bomb.

Violence is a good precursor to peace. Continual non-violence, however, will make people complacent and because it is human nature to fight, there will always be fighting. A society that functions by non-violence and non-violence only, however, will be much worse hit, physically and psychologically, than one that knows the taste of violence from time to time.

Everyone starts small. Nobody is born great.

I'm pretty sure this was supposed to be a Hallmark-style saying on your part anyway, but this is generally incorrect. Of course, there are examples of people rising from rags to riches, but the vast majority of the time the ones who are great usually have some kind of privileged childhood or were born with access to that greatness in the first place.

[Shaun]

Have you forgotten World War II? Once the war began, there was basically absolutely no diplomacy - the Allies demanded unconditional surrender and got it due to massive violence and nothing else, and the world seems to be significantly better off because of it. Sometimes you need an overload of violence to solve problems and to shake some sense into people's heads.

WW2 isn't a nation. It's a war. And it wasn't even a war amongst two countries, but one of multiple countries from all over the world.
And I never said that violence didn't work some of the time, I said that nations that consistently resort to it don't actually get anywhere within their borders, citing African nations as a prime example. WW2 was not an event that sprung further WWs. It was an isolated event that was resolved with violence effectively for the greater good, and then it stopped. Germany wasn't turned into a concentration camp, Germans weren't made slaves are massacred like the Jews. The war ended, and that was that. The Cold War, which wasn't really a war at all, was a response to that ending.

Right, because the average impovrished Indian cares about the state of the national economy, long-term problems and solutions, India's status in the world, etc. :rolleyes: Please. People in poverty are concerned with struggling to put food in their children's mouths each day and no-one can blame them for not thinking of such cosmopolitan matters when they hover close to death by starvation constantly. It's the poor locked in grinding poverty who have the most children and telling them to get their act together and "stop having so many damned kids" is about the most ignorant thing I've heard from anyone on this thread so far.

Ignorance isn't an excuse. It's a choice. And asking people not to have so many kids is not ignorant, it's simply a response to an issue that happens to be serious in the Indian community. Poverty would be drastically reduced if poorer families had fewer children. This is true anywhere.

And the Indian government is equally stuck because it functions as a democracy (a startlingly effective one for such a large country, actually) and thus cannot impose such totalitarian controls as countries like China have done. There's no solution unless there's a massive international effort of education about contraception and the like.

Actually, it can. Democracies are only bound by their constitutions and who the public willingly places into office. There are also ways for the government to make sure what needs to be done is done without resorting to totalitarian controls. If George Bush has taught us anything, it's that the government doesn't have to force you to be a certain way, it can just enact policies that create the conditions of whatever it is that they want you to be. Hence why abstinence education has actually proven to worsen teen pregnancy rates.

No, actually, mass death can be a very effective solution. People as far back as Alexander the Great knew that by razing cities to the ground, they could ensure long-term peace because other cities would be too intimidated to resist. The Americans did the same thing by slapping some sense into Japan's head with the atomic bomb.

Alexander the Great's empire fell and he was assassinated and millions of innocent people died for no reason other than to make sure that his empire would hold, which it didn't.

And the consequences of using the atom bomb were devastating to the world, if you recall. Not only is there fear of America, there is fear of any use of nuclear weaponry. While the reasons for the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were valid, the presentation of such weaponry and the subsequent mass deaths drastically changed the face of the world.

Violence is a good precursor to peace. Continual non-violence, however, will make people complacent and because it is human nature to fight, there will always be fighting. A society that functions by non-violence and non-violence only, however, will be much worse hit, physically and psychologically, than one that knows the taste of violence from time to time.

Never said that violence can't be used. I simply said that it needs to be used only when necessary, not whenever you feel threatened or because you are too stupid or too ignorant to resort to less violent means. Most of mankind's problems could be solved by peace talks if people weren't so caught up in their mindless obsession with killing one another to consider it.
And actually, nations that resort to non-violence, but have the means to enact significant violence, who are then hit tend to be the ones that hit back the hardest. Isolationist America, Sweden (if it were ever attacked), and others.

I'm pretty sure this was supposed to be a Hallmark-style saying on your part anyway, but this is generally incorrect. Of course, there are examples of people rising from rags to riches, but the vast majority of the time the ones who are great usually have some kind of privileged childhood or were born with access to that greatness in the first place.

Greatness isn't defined by one's birth. Just because you're filthy rich doesn't mean you are a great man or woman. Greatness is defined by character.

[eriko]

Ignorance isn't an excuse. It's a choice. And asking people not to have so many kids is not ignorant, it's simply a response to an issue that happens to be serious in the Indian community. Poverty would be drastically reduced if poorer families had fewer children. This is true anywhere.
It is easier said than done.

Actually, it can. Democracies are only bound by their constitutions and who the public willingly places into office. There are also ways for the government to make sure what needs to be done is done without resorting to totalitarian controls. If George Bush has taught us anything, it's that the government doesn't have to force you to be a certain way, it can just enact policies that create the conditions of whatever it is that they want you to be. Hence why abstinence education has actually proven to worsen teen pregnancy rates.
India and America are two different cases. In America the executive is not answerable to the parliament. That is why it is easy for letting the bill passed. But in India it is the opposite. Do you really think that power-hungery oppsition will let th governemnt do anything. Actually in the seventies Indhira Gandhi, India's first woman prime minister imposed emergency In India. Sent all politician to jail. Even eradicated sikh terrorism. There were these med van that would go from village to village castrating people. New laws and stict policies cam up. BUt then when the emergency ended, elections came up opposition was given the power. My mom tell me that it was hard on people even though what she did was for them. Well she was the man.

[Shaun]

India and America are two different cases. In America the executive is not answerable to the parliament. That is why it is easy for letting the bill passed. But in India it is the opposite. Do you really think that power-hungery oppsition will let th governemnt do anything. Actually in the seventies Indhira Gandhi, India's first woman prime minister imposed emergency In India. Sent all politician to jail. Even eradicated sikh terrorism. There were these med van that would go from village to village castrating people. New laws and stict policies cam up. BUt then when the emergency ended, elections came up opposition was given the power. My mom tell me that it was hard on people even though what she did was for them. Well she was the man.

Umm, actually, in America, the President has very little power. Anything the President wants to get done generally has to be ratified by Congress or Senate. It's not easy to get bills passed in America. One has to have a majority.

Yes, that sounds like a wonderful Prime Minister, running around castrating people. Lovely.

[jordanisonfire]

Yeah, people say that LBJ was the best president, at least until the end of his office, because he managed to get the most laws passed through Congress, and all of them beneficial to everyone.

[eriko]

Umm, actually, in America, the President has very little power. Anything the President wants to get done generally has to be ratified by Congress or Senate. It's not easy to get bills passed in America. One has to have a majority..

Really! But I thought that the Government is not answerable to the parliament. That is what we are taught in our Political Science book.

Yes, that sounds like a wonderful Prime Minister, running around castrating people. Lovely
ActuallY I am not sure about this I read it in a book. But it was a work of fiction. And they were castrating people which already had 7-10 children. Though I should have not connected the two things. But anyways you need to be strict if you want to deliver a positive change in the society even though your methods are not morally sound. Maybe she did not do this. Why did I say this?:blush:

In India there is a sound majority of people who believe China's system is much better and effective.

[Shaun]

Really! But I thought that the Government is not answerable to the parliament. That is what we are taught in our Political Science book.

Your political science book is wrong and if your teachers are teaching you that, then they are idiots and should have their teaching credentials stripped from them. The only reason Bush got away with so much of what he got away with was because he had the support of Congress. That's how it works here. The President can't just come up and say "all Indians are officially to be sent to concentration camps and murdered." Well, he could say that, but if Congress didn't ratify it and support that decision, it would just be words and most likely everyone in the U.S. would throw a fit over such a statement and that President would likely be removed from office.

In the U.S., the government isn't run by the President, but by three separate branches (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial). Each is supposed to work via checks and balances, preventing one from crossing the line, etc. It doesn't always work, but generally the idea is solid. The President is part of the Executive Branch, but he doesn't rule it. The President, more or less, is powerless except in instances of national emergency. This is why the U.S. President has a cabinet of folks who have different specialties (war, economy, etc. etc. etc.) so that he can make proper decisions. Of course, as I said, it doesn't always work as it should, but we also have a chance to get rid of someone we don't like every 4 years, and every 8 they are automatically cycled out and someone new has to come in. So even when the U.S. government goes bad, we have the opportunity to change things. Hence why Obama seems to be such a beacon for folks.


ActuallY I am not sure about this I read it in a book. But it was a work of fiction. And they were castrating people which already had 7-10 children. Though I should have not connected the two things. But anyways you need to be strict if you want to deliver a positive change in the society even though your methods are not morally sound. Maybe she did not do this. Why did I say this?:blush:

Well, I should hope she didn't do this. It's wrong and cruel.

In India there is a sound majority of people who believe China's system is much better and effective.

As a system of government it works well. Communist governments, when run by fairly competent people, actually tend to work. The problem, though, is that the people have little power, these types of governments become too secure in their power and begin to crack down on citizens. China's citizens literally have no rights. Anything we think they have, they don't, because the government can do anything it wants there. China's government is simply corrupt and refuses to acknowledge its problems. This is what happens when too few have too much power. Democracy is not a perfect system, but when run correctly it is generally the best thing for everyone. People shouldn't be afraid of the government; the government should be afraid of the people.

[Nyx]

I
I don't think how? And don't you give me the example of Gandhi. Most Indians believe that non-violence is no way of fighting oppression. And maybe we would have got our freedom quite sooner if not for him. He was a reformer I respect him for that but not a freedom fighter.


Sorry for being judgemental. But is this a sarcastic remark? I hope not.

Yes, you can solve things with no-violence. Don't get me wrong, if you fight strong against an oppressive government you can sure as hell bet they will get rid of you by any violent means if they can. But the the thing is, opression is well planned, it's thought through. May it be violent, it is also intelligent and if you want to beat them at their own game well you have to be smarter. As much as I think anyone in a country under oppression, like Palestine, who is on the battlefield and defending their country and their family is very brave, I don't think those of us who aren't there should go there and get in the battlefield and help the defence through violence. Those of us in more privilaged countries who have had education, who have access to information, etc, can do more. Sure, it's very self-sacrificing for someone from a western country to go to Palestine and help the refugees right there, to be in the line of fire, and I don't think I would ever be brave enough to do that.

But one more person dead isn't going to change much, sure it might get a bit of press but probably not even.

The way to beat them, the oppression, is to loosen their building blocks, to beat their game. And yes, it'll take longer, it won't be done tmorrow, maybe not even in 10 years, but it'll be done for the next generation or maybe the one after.

And no, I was not being sarcastic.

[eriko]

And the Indian government is equally stuck because it functions as a democracy (a startlingly effective one for such a large country, actually) and thus cannot impose such totalitarian controls as countries like China have done. There's no solution unless there's a massive international effort of education about contraception and the like.
Indian government is driven by pseudo-secularist thought process. The minority is always taking advantage of the majority. There are separate civil code for Hindus and rest of the religions. Hindus have to register their marriages but other religions are not entittled to. Muslims can marry four times. Like wise, an upper caste (Hindus especially) who are poor are denied reservations while the lower caste who are rich have access to reservations. Well this solves the mystery of effective governing. Constitutionally this is wrong though.

Though I agree with Dio sometimes violence is the only option. But to be very frank I am a very tolerant and non-violent person. And firmly believe that what is wrong is wrong no matter what. But then the other time you have to check your own judgement about things. This is what a Muslim cleric said after a blast by Muslim terrorists. He said: Terrorists have no religion. They are all sinners. But then he added this as well if Muslims is a communty that respects the other Indian commmunities than it can also bring them down.

This I felt was very wrong. I thought: what the heck this man thinks he is doing. Instead of trying to stabilise the whole thing he is fuelling it. To some extent I felt angry and then this is what I thought: Why am I not like them that is I should also be a Hindu radical and stop people like him from taking advatage of us.

Same is the case with the lower caste as I have above mentioned. But let me explain what Hindu tolerance is actually like:

This debate took place in my class. It came in the news that the Muslim clerics have denied burial to terrorist involved in Mumbai attack. Each one of us said that yes this is how it should happen. But then one girl said: This is totally wrong nobody can deny anybody their burial. When life ends and so does everything. What the terrorist did was in their life but now they are dead. I am not telling the peope here to forget what happened or even to forgive them. But this is unjust on our part. According to the Law of Karma the terrorists will get their punishment. We must fight and even kill people like such because our actions are justified. But when one is dead the fight should end as well.

At that time I opposed her. But later when I thought about it: actually this extreme ideology that exist in the people (in this case the muslim clerics) is actually giving rise to terrorism. Because this fact is we should fight terrorism and not the terrorists. We should fight this ideology that exists in each and every religion sometimes its weak sometimes it is intense.

Anyways I am not saying Muslims are wrong guys. No I never meant it. But I am taking about the Urban sphere and this is how things are here. But if you go to rural India still there are many Hindus that object to eating with the Muslims or employing them. But Hindus are not as radical as Muslims when it comes to religion. And to justify my tolerance, this I must tell you as well, to be fair on my part, recently Hindu radicals bombed a Muslim area as well. This is the first time this happened and I really want to take an IRON ROD IN MY HAND AND HIT THEM ON THEIR HEAD SO THAT THEY PERMANETLY LOOSE THEIR MEMORIES.

Conclusion; I am very confused about this. But then one thing is damn sure tolerance (in my case and also the Indian government's case) has become a sign of weakness. And because the people exploit and disrespect the other communty the other community looses its patience and also stikes back, the hindu blast case is the example.

Your political science book is wrong and if your teachers are teaching you that, then they are idiots and should have their teaching credentials stripped from them.Sorry about this Shaun can't blame the text book though they only said that the Senate is not answerable to the parliament. That is the parliament can ask for justification of their actions (Maybe after the law has passed..I think I mixed up the two things)but the senate is not inclined to anwer but in India if the governement is not able to anwer the opposition the governemnt is dissolved then and there.

Well, I should hope she didn't do this. It's wrong and cruel.
I am really sorry. On second thoughts I don't think she did this. She was strict, ruled with an iron hand but was not cruel. Oh! God I am really very sorry. May her soul rest in peace.

The way to beat them, the oppression, is to loosen their building blocks, to beat their game. And yes, it'll take longer, it won't be done tmorrow, maybe not even in 10 years, but it'll be done for the next generation or maybe the one after.
I have already stated my views on this. I am done. This is my last post on this thread. I am tired of this debate.

And no, I was not being sarcastic.
Sorry, I just felt it was a little strange of you to say that.

[Shaun]

Unfortunately you cannot beat terrorism with violence. The only way to beat it is to do what Nyx said: beat them at their own game. They manipulate children, teach them horrible things, take advantage of people in dire straights. Well, do the opposite. Strive to teach children good values, to teach them what is right and wrong. People who are in the low, bring them up, help them. You cannot beat radicals with more violence. It doesn't work. Terrorism is something that cannot be destroyed by a bullet. Because no matter how hard you try, the only way to end it is to erradicate all of mankind. There will always be those that are willing to blow themselves up for a stupid ideal; the best way to get rid of those people is to stop the spreading of lies and hatred.