US recognizes Jerusalem as capital of Israel

[Fargo]

I was not aware. Seems to confirm my distrust. I think when the dust settles, what's left has Israel more in the right than not. But there's a lot of **** in the dust that people should acknowledge.

Yeah, the commander of the Irgun who ordered it became prime minister of Israel and those that orchestrated and carried it out figured prominently in the new government. They continue to blame the British for failing to get out of the way of the bombs they planted in the hotel and in the street.

Im not trying to make some sort of moral equivalence but IMO there is a ton of grey if you really want to look at the history of the area going back to the Mandate.

 

[actaeon277]

She is funny....The way she handles the obvious flack she gets from her past career is handled with a razor sharp wit...Her husband is IDF so she was very happy yesterday and the more radical element were trying their best to tear her down and they failed miserably...

So are we going to hear what the tweet was?

 

[indiucky]

So are we going to hear what the tweet was?

Here is one I could find....

 

[actaeon277]

Jenna Jameson's twitter feed yesterday was awesome...Plus I got 2 likes from her and she responded to me via tweet that my tweet was "awesome"....

Wife thought the first like was cute....Not so much the second...

I was thinking of this.


I'm thinking you are not Brian Stelter.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Wait.

This paragraph is where I have the problem.

You start of with "strip away the embellishments," etc., then end with lumping ALL Palestinians in together. That's embellishment. Taking away the rights of ALL Palestinians, because of some Palestinians, is actually, literally, justifying oppressive regulations (if not outright oppression) on the basis of "its for security."

Let's at least recognize it for what it is.

Perhaps a different example would be helpful. The Soviets justified all sorts of oppression because of security concerns. What makes that different?

Maybe the Palestinians that are doing the fighting should wear uniforms... you know, like every other military in the civilized world. Trigger aluded to it... hiding among innocents is the act of a coward, not a soldier.

 

[Fargo]

Maybe the Palestinians that are doing the fighting should wear uniforms... you know, like every other military in the civilized world. Trigger aluded to it... hiding among innocents is the act of a coward, not a soldier.

What did the Irgun, Lehi, and Haganah wear while conducting their various bombing campaigns?

 

[KLB]

What did the Irgun, Lehi, and Haganah wear while conducting their various bombing campaigns?

Is this your version of "but Obama"?

 

[Fargo]

Is this your version of "but Obama"?

Nope, just curious if the same standard/criticism gets applied all around. I'm in no way justifying what the Palestinians are doing, so I suppose it is kinda the opposite.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

What did the Irgun, Lehi, and Haganah wear while conducting their various bombing campaigns?

I'll admit I'm not familiar with them. Were they acting as official representatives of the Israeli military, or were they acting on their own?

 

[Fargo]

I'll admit I'm not familiar with them. Were they acting as official representatives of the Israeli military, or were they acting on their own?

They were the three primary Jewish military organizations which waged a bombing and guerrila campaign against the British Mandate in the 30's/40's leading up to the British abandoning it. They bombed the King David Hotel, they bombed a passenger liner that was being used to deport illegal immigrants leading to the drowning of several hundred Jews, they blew up trains and infrastructure etc. They also assassinated various British government officials.

The leadership of the organizations largely became the government of Israel once the British pulled out and the Arabs were driven out. The fellow who ordered the bombing of the King David Hotel became prime minister.

Once again, I'm not trying to make some sort of moral equivalency and nor am I trying to justify the actions of either side. I guess I just grow weary of the moral outrage about "terrorism" when that is exactly what was used to drive to the British out.

 

[Kutnupe14]

They were the three primary Jewish military organizations which waged a bombing and guerrila campaign against the British Mandate in the 30's/40's leading up to the British abandoning it. They bombed the King David Hotel, they bombed a passenger liner that was being used to deport illegal immigrants leading to the drowning of several hundred Jews, they blew up trains and infrastructure etc. They also assassinated various British government officials.

The leadership of the organizations largely became the government of Israel once the British pulled out and the Arabs were driven out. The fellow who ordered the bombing of the King David Hotel became prime minister.

Once again, I'm not trying to make some sort of moral equivalency and nor am I trying to justify the actions of either side. I guess I just grow weary of the moral outrage about "terrorism" when that is exactly what was used to drive to the British out.

 

[T.Lex]

I'll admit I'm not familiar with them. Were they acting as official representatives of the Israeli military, or were they acting on their own?

Look them up. There was no "Israel."

Wait.

In the Biblical/Talmudic sense, I guess there always has been.

But in the geo-political sense, with a flag and borders and stuff, there wasn't.

Might also look up Balfour Declaration.

ETA:
Dangit! I didn't realize it took me that long to type up 5 lines! Need. Mo. Coffeeeeee.

 

[KLB]

They were the three primary Jewish military organizations which waged a bombing and guerrila campaign against the British Mandate in the 30's/40's leading up to the British abandoning it. They bombed the King David Hotel, they bombed a passenger liner that was being used to deport illegal immigrants leading to the drowning of several hundred Jews, they blew up trains and infrastructure etc. They also assassinated various British government officials.

The leadership of the organizations largely became the government of Israel once the British pulled out and the Arabs were driven out. The fellow who ordered the bombing of the King David Hotel became prime minister.

Once again, I'm not trying to make some sort of moral equivalency and nor am I trying to justify the actions of either side. I guess I just grow weary of the moral outrage about "terrorism" when that is exactly what was used to drive to the British out.

A prime example of perspective of winners and losers. Those who won are freedom fighters. Those who lost or have yet to win are terrorists.

 

[Ziggidy]

I guess I just grow weary of the moral outrage about "terrorism" when that is exactly what was used to drive to the British out.

Who were the terrorists in the US Revolutionary War? WWII?

I personally do not believe "similar tactics" represents one's intent or purpose.

 

[Kutnupe14]

Who were the terrorists in the US Revolutionary War? WWII?

I personally do not believe "similar tactics" represents one's intent or purpose.

It also depends on perspective. Keep in mind many colonists did view the Revolutionaries as terrorists. They were most certainly traitors (to the crown), so taking up arms against the British and fighting with unconventional methods to bring about political change does fit the definition of terrorism fairly well.

 

[T.Lex]

This is where we devolve into definitional issues.

If the definition of "terrorism" hinges on tactics, rather than motivation, things get really awkward.

 

[Ziggidy]

This is where we devolve into definitional issues.

If the definition of "terrorism" hinges on tactics, rather than motivation, things get really awkward.

I agree.

Terrorism comes in many forms but its intent is malicious and hateful.

I get perturbed when I hear people say "you're acting just like the terrorists, you cannot do that!". Hogwash I say! Why can't the civilized world use the same tactics as the terrorists?

What is the defining characteristic that separates us from them?

 

[T.Lex]

What is the defining characteristic that separates us from them?

Victory?

(BTW, isn't war by nature malicious and hateful?)

 

[Kutnupe14]

I agree.

Terrorism comes in many forms but its intent is malicious and hateful.

I get perturbed when I hear people say "you're acting just like the terrorists, you cannot do that!". Hogwash I say! Why can't the civilized world use the same tactics as the terrorists?

What is the defining characteristic that separates us from them?

The belief that we are morally right. You see the problem there, right?

 

[Ziggidy]

The belief that we are morally right. You see the problem there, right?

Morality, funny word. Arguments can be made on all sides; however, I truly believe God of the Bible gave us (to those who listen) a compass to know the difference.

The immoral ideology of "death to all who disagree" is something I truly believe majority of the world can agree on; far from being moral. There is a real good/evil war that is constant.

To allow one to live in peace is moral. To torture and kill because you do not agree, is immoral. We know better.....