Israel, Gaza, And Everyone Else

[Rob Osborn]

My views on Terrorism are developed by three years studying the phenomenon at undergraduate level and another year at MA level at Warwick university in England. My five years service in the British Army's intelligence corps which included an operational tour of Iraq also contributed greatly. So if your suggesting that my view of terrorism is distorted because my appreciation of it extends beyond that of simply accepting whatever my political leaders tell me it is, I guess you're absolutely right. Might I suggest that you read up a little on terrorism, its roots and foundations before you make such comments.

I know what terrorism is. Hamas defines perfectly the rule of a terrorist organization. You have a distorted reality. Thats the problem in todays society who more often than not, end up siding with the terrorists.

[Rob Osborn]

Sounds like you've bought into the "bombed back to the stone age" nonsense?

No, its called common sense. Read the Book of Mormon, especially the parts about ancient terrorist groups like the Gadianton Robbers. More often than not, you have to hunt down and kill their leaders to stop the problem. You cant negotiate with terrorist leaders. The nephites were always justified in the defense of their lives and lands.

[ERayR]

The blame game is played by both Palestine and Israel. I consider both countries guilty of terrorism and acts that ultimately harm their own people. Both sides show an inability listen.

My solution is equally naive as some others here. Would Israel dare to bomb anywhere in the Gaza strip if important US dignitaries were there? Would Palestine dare send any rockets into Israel if important leaders and dignitaries from the Arab world were moving about in Israel? Are there many people in the world who would dare to place themselves in harms way to protect the innocents on either side? My hope is that a real peace corp will gather, not armed to the teeth, but merely willing to declare, by putting themselves in danger, that this idiocy of conflict must stop? It's naive, I know, but threats and terror with weapons has achieved diddly squat

Yep very naïve.

[ERayR]

My views on Terrorism are developed by three years studying the phenomenon at undergraduate level and another year at MA level at Warwick university in England. My five years service in the British Army's intelligence corps which included an operational tour of Iraq also contributed greatly. So if your suggesting that my view of terrorism is distorted because my appreciation of it extends beyond that of simply accepting whatever my political leaders tell me it is, I guess you're absolutely right. Might I suggest that you read up a little on terrorism, its roots and foundations before you make such comments.

To get a better and more accurate perspective why don't you study it from the area in Israel where Hamas is lobbing in rockets. I'm sure your understanding will mature a little.

[ERayR]

Thank you for the reference list.

For a real understanding why don't you add to your list reading the above in an apartment in Israel.

[ERayR]

Can we all at least agree that the super hero in the latest cease fire was Hillary Clinton? Say what you will about her plastered-down hairdo and her haggard look, but upon landing following a long flight, she was able to accomplish in a matter of minutes what neither side was able finesse for weeks. Who can doubt the healing power and self-evident softening affect on both sides of her weeks earlier broadcast apologizing for and expressing outrage against the video that sparked the spontaneous protest in Benghazi?

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

The information I was hearing is that the cease fire was already negotiated and was held up several hours just so Hilary could be there for the photo op.

[Rob Osborn]

Here is a good article regarding the "refugees"-

http://www.factsandlogic.org/ad_100.html

[wenglund]

Wade, Thanks for the perspective. While it's true that Hillary does not garner any fashion points and has never been high on my favorites list (Collateral damage from Bill), but she does a good job and replacing her with the insidious Susan Rice would truly be unfortunate.

het beste - lwiscombe

The sad part about Hillary leaving is that she was ever so close to insuring virtual world peace. Her objection to water-boarding and terrorist imprisonments at Gitmo, her demand that terrorist be tried in civilian rather than military courts, led invariably to the death of Ben Laden and his Al Quida organization, and if she just had a little more time to work her "lead from behind" magic, and could be in a position to distribute more apology commercials, there is no doubt that Iran would have ceased their nuclear weapons advancements, and all the other terrorist organizations (like the Taliban and Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood) would have been neutralized and the bonds of love forged between the Arab nations and Israel. All we would be left with then would be imaginary threats and attacks invented by the right-wing media, like Benghazi and the bomb threat of the Federal Reserve bank and fast-and-furious. Life would have been great for all sides.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[wenglund]

The information I was hearing is that the cease fire was already negotiated and was held up several hours just so Hilary could be there for the photo op.

You can't seriously believe that Hillary would stoop so low as to request that the violence and bloodshed continue until she got to Israel just so she could get the credit? I mean it isn't as though she has any motive to distract attention away from other troubles nor any need to restore her reputation. After all, she is our chief diplomat, and not a politician. Give me a break!

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

[canard78]

For a real understanding why don't you add to your list reading the above in an apartment in Israel.

Or maybe a refugee camp in the West bank?

[canard78]

I know what terrorism is. Hamas defines perfectly the rule of a terrorist organization. You have a distorted reality. Thats the problem in todays society who more often than not, end up siding with the terrorists.

Perhaps you would like to provide your sources for your superior "knowledge." Angryjock has provided a comprehensive reading list, several years of study and personal front-line experience of terrorists.

So far all you've provided is a link to FLAME which within a few minutes of browsing the site was clearly subjective anti-Arabic propaganda.

I would suggest Angryjock's are in no way representative of society given very few have done much more watch the news and read a few biased websites. So far I think he's got more credibility.

[canard78]

No, its called common sense. Read the Book of Mormon, especially the parts about ancient terrorist groups like the Gadianton Robbers. More often than not, you have to hunt down and kill their leaders to stop the problem. You cant negotiate with terrorist leaders. The nephites were always justified in the defense of their lives and lands.

Can you give me one quote from the book of mormon where the Gadianton "terrorists" were eradicated by force and the sword? The only example I'm aware of is quite the opposite. When the lamanites 'hunted them' to extend the hand of friendship and teach the gospel, the "terrorists" dissolved. Sounds like conciliatory action to me. You may be an RM, if so (and depending on your era) you'll know that effective preaching of the gospel usually follows the Ammon model. Service, compassion, building on common beliefs. I am not aware of any examples of the Gadiantons being destroyed by force.

Helaman 6:37 "And it came to pass that the Lamanites did hunt the band of robbers of Gadianton; and they did preach the word of God among the more wicked part of them, insomuch that this band of robbers was utterly destroyed from among the Lamanites."

Helaman 11 the Nephites think they're rid of them, but within a few verses they're back stronger than before. 'The word' was the only tool that worked to full effectiveness. Negotiation, compassion, understanding, friendship.

[Calm]

The sad part about Hillary leaving is that she was ever so close to insuring virtual world peace. Her objection to water-boarding and terrorist imprisonments at Gitmo, her demand that terrorist be tried in civilian rather than military courts, led invariably to the death of Ben Laden and his Al Quida organization, and if she just had a little more time to work her "lead from behind" magic, and could be in a position to distribute more apology commercials, there is no doubt that Iran would have ceased their nuclear weapons advancements, and all the other terrorist organizations (like the Taliban and Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood) would have been neutralized and the bonds of love forged between the Arab nations and Israel. All we would be left with then would be imaginary threats and attacks invented by the right-wing media, like Benghazi and the bomb threat of the Federal Reserve bank and fast-and-furious. Life would have been great for all sides.

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Feeling somewhat sarcastic today, are we?

[canard78]

Here is a good article regarding the "refugees"-

http://www.factsandl...org/ad_100.html

How about something a little less subjective? You're undermining your argument by referencing something so blatantly biased.

Here's Flame's propaganda: "A homeland for Arab Palestinians? Of course, they deserve one. They have such a country. It's Jordan."

http://www.factsandlogic.org/ad_05.html

FLAME's president Gerardo Joffe has said: "All Arab Muslims may not be a bunch of fanatics, but I've never met one who isn't."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facts_and_Logic_About_the_Middle_East

I'd find some new sources if I were you. Perhaps AngryJock's reading list would be a good start...