A New Thread fot the Current Israel/Palestine/Lebanon mess

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1021 of them)
i am sorry, but i found your comment about the danes pretty offensive given what they did during ww2 to help the jews. it was flippant and dismissive, also, as if to say that any other ethnicity or group cannot be oppressed. certainly the danes are not particularly oppressed (tho obviously their exports to the middle east are down right now!), nor have a history of it, but i don't think ANYONE is served by comparing one oppression to another, or even one to none. what is going on right now in lebanon is one country brutally oppressing another. period.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:25 (nineteen years ago)

yeah i have no idea why portraying a muslim cleric - even if he's an asshole - as a snake would be offensive (second google hit for "snakes allah")

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:27 (nineteen years ago)

What they did to help the Jews doesn't go unappreciated, btw. My father unabashedly loves Denmark and lived there for this reason alone.

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:28 (nineteen years ago)

Dude, relax. My dad organized a tribute concert and wrote music to commemorate the Danish rescue of Jews when I was in high school, and I ate dinner with one of the rescuers. I harbor no animosity toward the Danes.

Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:28 (nineteen years ago)

dads4danes

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:30 (nineteen years ago)

May I say that this exchange has been FUCKING RIDICULOUS?!

Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:30 (nineteen years ago)

it still smacked to me of a "they're not worthy because they don't have a centuries-old history of oppression" style insult. which may seem silly of me to assume, at least of you, but almost every ethnic/religious group/whathaveyou says that.

which is crazy since we all know it's the WOMEN who have it bad in this fucked up world.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:31 (nineteen years ago)

xpost - i would only characterize squirrel police's posts as such, mr. hurtin'.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:31 (nineteen years ago)

Not what I meant at all. Clearly a misunderstanding.

Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:32 (nineteen years ago)

I really doubt that the designers of that flyer were thinking "Gee how can we religiously offend the people who see this?" It's propaganda, not piss-you-off flyers.

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:33 (nineteen years ago)

uh, hrm, ok well we seem to have different perspectives on how propaganda "works," then.

xpost - sorry for the misunderstanding, hurting.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:36 (nineteen years ago)

I'm reminded of a story I heard about American propaganda for Iraqi audiences that made fun of Saddam Hussein for having a mustache.

Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:36 (nineteen years ago)

I'm reminded of a story I heard about American propaganda for Iraqi audiences that made fun of Saddam Hussein for having a mustache.

yes, this particular flier seems about as effective as that, esp. given that it was dropped in a predominantly christian, affluent section of beirut. y'know, the part of beirut where, for most of the civil war and occupation, israel had allies.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:37 (nineteen years ago)

and if some people don't get what i'm talking about with that post, in the arab world to insult a man's moustache is quite the offensive. remember that chuckle all us westerners got out of that arab league meeting a couple years ago?

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:38 (nineteen years ago)

Clueless I can buy, purposely offensive I can't.

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:42 (nineteen years ago)

well the intel as to where hezbollah caches might be as opposed to, say, where dairy farms might be certainly seems clueless. but i am not sure that i buy the argument that the israelis don't have a very keen sense of islamic culture(s).

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:43 (nineteen years ago)

So Israel ran out of bombs and has decided to offend the Lebanese to death?

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:47 (nineteen years ago)

Is it so inconceivable that not every single thing Israel does is for evil purposes?

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:49 (nineteen years ago)

no, they are making a half-assed effort at trying to turn christian, secular and moderate muslim lebanese against hezbollah, and it won't fucking work. they've alienated whatever allies they haven't killed.

xpost - vad yashem isn't evil. the wailing wall isn't evil. goa fucking trance on the beach seems evil to me, tho.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:50 (nineteen years ago)

also not to play the second-oldest card next to godwin's law (ha!), but the def. of "propaganda" is:

Main Entry: pro·pa·gan·da
Pronunciation: "prä-p&-'gan-d&, "prO-
Function: noun
Etymology: New Latin, from Congregatio de propaganda fide Congregation for propagating the faith, organization established by Pope Gregory XV died 1623
1 capitalized : a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect

just ignore that first entry (interesting! the roman catholics invented it, sort of). i'm not a very ends-justify-the-means person, sorry.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:53 (nineteen years ago)

Is turning people against Hezbollah a bad thing?

That's pretty much my only point here. It won't fucking work might be right for a number of reasons, but the motive isn't particularly evil.

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:55 (nineteen years ago)

i know as an american i have little to stand on when it comes to this, but i personally get a little squeamish when it comes to one country trying to dictate another country's politics to its citizens.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:57 (nineteen years ago)

I called it propaganda myself...so I'm not sure what your point is there. Quite surely, it is propaganda. Still doesn't make it evil.

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:58 (nineteen years ago)

again, i have no doubt that its intended audience will view it as pretty damn evil.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 04:59 (nineteen years ago)

Sure. But that still doesn't mean it was done with an evil intent.

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:05 (nineteen years ago)

i dunno, call me crazy but war is pretty evil to me!

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:06 (nineteen years ago)

you're crazy

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:09 (nineteen years ago)

i knew it!

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:09 (nineteen years ago)

And yeah, war totally sucks man. That doesn't mean every single thing a country at war does is some heinous war crime. Howbout those fliers Israel dropped warning Lebanese citizens? Surely you can find some angle to fault Israel here?

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:11 (nineteen years ago)

Bad for the environment, maybe?

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:12 (nineteen years ago)

y'know it's getting late for me to keep being your strawman, but i don't think i've ever claimed that israel or everything the idf does is a "war crime." though attacking a sovereign nation in the midst of peace, targeting infrastructure (and perhaps citizens) and actual food (three trucks delivering vegetables to the south were hit today, way to go!), blowing up peacekeepers and civilians from other nations and forcing the evacuation of some million-odd people seem pretty close. that israel dropped fliers warning residents to evacuate (oddly, some of these were dropped AFTER many roads and bridges were already destroyed) doesn't exonerate any of those things, and i fail to see any reason why you continue to insist that my stance is so "anti-israel" or somehow "faulting" israel for "everything." i have no sympathy for hezbollah, iran, or syria - and not even that much for egypt or jordan, israel's "allies" (when it's convenient for both sides, of course).

xpost - re: environment, would you just read beirut update already you shmiel? you can read about the oil spill there.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:17 (nineteen years ago)

http://www.marketeast.com/site_images/39993_large.jpg

Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:18 (nineteen years ago)

i have no idea what a "shmiel" is, btw, but it sounds nasty. good night.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:20 (nineteen years ago)

Shlemiel?

Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:22 (nineteen years ago)

I'm faulting you for being knee-jerk anti-Israel because instead of complaining about those things in your last paragraph, you're finding fault in a silly political cartoon which really doesn't offer much anti-Israel ammo in the first place.

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:24 (nineteen years ago)

shlamozzle... hassenfeffer incorporated!

c'mon, everyone sing the "laverne & shirley" theme!

ok now i know i need sleep.

xpost - dick you ruined my joke. and i just posted the cartoon and the blog where i found it, you guys ran with it.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:25 (nineteen years ago)

know as an american i have little to stand on when it comes to this, but i personally get a little squeamish when it comes to one country trying to dictate another country's politics to its citizens.

No need for UN resolutions then? Such as, I dunno ... resolution 1559 demanding the disarmament of Hezbollah? Voted on by every country in the entire world?

This thread took some strange turns. Israeli soldiers have been killed in friendly fire incidents in the last few days (one involved two helicopters crashing) and I'm sure once the investigations are complete we'll discover that there were several repeated warnings to hold fire, coming from people throughout the chain of command. Conclusion: they either fucked up, or OMG IT WAS CLEARLY DELIBERATE, THE ISRAELIS ARE KILLING THEMSELVES IN ORDER TO INCREASE THEIR DEATH COUNT AND COURT WORLD SYMPATHY.

NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:26 (nineteen years ago)

also read the goddamn thread i've been complaining about that shit from day fucking one. you're just looking for any excuse now. again, good night, god bless, go ahead, get your fuckin' last word in.

xpost dammit barry don't you start now too. you know that friendly-fire has nothing to do with BOMBING A UN OUTPOST FOR SIX FUCKING HOURS.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:27 (nineteen years ago)

not to mention it's completely backfiring, there is not very much sympathy for israel in the world right now, if you haven't noticed. which of course you guys will then use to claim that the u.n. is full of "anti-israel" sentiment despite res. 1559! can't have it both ways.

and neither can i, this time i'm really going (maybe).

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:28 (nineteen years ago)

No clearly the UN loves Israel.

starke (starke), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:30 (nineteen years ago)

Both are stupid fuckups. Hezbollah were stationed 500 m away, once the first bomb hit they could no longer positively identify what they were hitting, calls from the UN got lost in military beaurocracy and the right people weren't told to divert their fire, there are a million explanations that don't involve silly conspiracy theories.

NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:32 (nineteen years ago)

if you haven't noticed. which of course you guys will then use to claim that the u.n. is full of "anti-israel" sentiment despite res. 1559!

Yes, 1559 was entirely about helping Israel (who left Lebanon five years earlier) and had nothing to do with improving life in Lebanon.

NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:33 (nineteen years ago)

Also, for every UN resolution that is beneficial to Israel you have about 100 that criticise it. I'd call that biased.

NoTimeBeforeTime (Barry Bruner), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:35 (nineteen years ago)

Can criticism never be warranted?

Zora (Zora), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:44 (nineteen years ago)

ok ok ok one last post to clarify, barry:

know as an american i have little to stand on when it comes to this, but i personally get a little squeamish when it comes to one country trying to dictate another country's politics to its citizens.

No need for UN resolutions then? Such as, I dunno ... resolution 1559 demanding the disarmament of Hezbollah? Voted on by every country in the entire world?

the un, last i checked, wasn't a country. if it wasn't obvious my post that you responded to was in reference to the us invasion and occupation of iraq. i have a hard time believing you were terribly in favor it, tho i'd bet that you're no fan of saddam either. tho i guess in this situation it's not really parallel since un headquarters in baghdad didn't have a direct line to the people who blew it up.

Yes, 1559 was entirely about helping Israel (who left Lebanon five years earlier) and had nothing to do with improving life in Lebanon.

this seems a little bit silly since there's not really any other force or faction in lebanon that threatens israel as far as i know aside from hezbollah. so it goes to figure that improving life in lebanon = improving life in israel. i'm not really sure why, having argued just a minute before as to the virtue of 1559, you turn back around and knock it as something that was done cynically to benefit only the lebanese, having no particular effect on israel when clearly that couldn't be the case.

Also, for every UN resolution that is beneficial to Israel you have about 100 that criticise it. I'd call that biased.

i agree but you have to distinguish between resolutions by the security council and the general assembly. let's face it: most countries don't exactly like israel, but the u.n. is ostensibly - at least on paper - a democratic organization that also happens to be headquartered in the "most powerful nation on earth"TM. if anybody pulls the strings or dictates terms, it's the united states. which means the g.a. can make all the symbolic votes it wants in regards to how "bad" israel is. and the actions by israel in the past two weeks sure ain't gonna erase that bias. they have only intensified the bias.

hstencil (hstencil), Thursday, 27 July 2006 05:45 (nineteen years ago)

i know as an american i have little to stand on when it comes to this, but i personally get a little squeamish when it comes to one country trying to dictate another country's politics to its citizens.
-- hstencil (hstenc!...), July 27th, 2006.

which was actually the thrust of the propaganda flier, no? ie syria GTFO.

its the UN's job to try to maintain a peaceful, non-partisan presence in warzone situations where there are likely to be abuses, humanitarian crises, etc.

hard to resist: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4156819.stm

Roughage Crew (Enrique), Thursday, 27 July 2006 08:13 (nineteen years ago)

Well, it did take surprisingly long for this thread to descend into nonsense.

Jessie the Monster (scarymonsterrr), Thursday, 27 July 2006 11:19 (nineteen years ago)

i think we reached that point around the 'israel deliberately attacked the uss liberty' mark.

Roughage Crew (Enrique), Thursday, 27 July 2006 11:21 (nineteen years ago)

It wasn't so much what was said as much as it was all the shrieking and personal attacks. :/ Also the apparent premise that Israel was either 100% conspiring to take down the UN or it was a complete and total mistake (couldn't they have just not cared that they were hitting the UN? Additionally, if the anonymous source was right--"preparing for a ground invasion" sounds kind of odd when they could have said "well Hezbollah was standing over there"). Also I'd like to clarify the reason I reposted the excerpt was because, IMO anyway, if the UN gave Hezbollah's exact position (500 yds away from the building) and Israel was shelling within 50 yds of the building, ummmm. My friend pointed out that Israel probably believes their own intelligence before anybody elses and that may have been the root cause of this. But come ON, if this isn't excessive, what is?

Has anybody seen the news articles about Israelis hitting Red Cross ambulances transporting civilians?

Jessie the Monster (scarymonsterrr), Thursday, 27 July 2006 11:39 (nineteen years ago)

yes. with the UN thing, it's not hard to believe it's an accident. if it's not -- i just can't figures out the angles. what would they gain from it? i wouldn't 100% rule it out, but yikes.

as with the red cross vehicles it's possible they are so paranoid and aggressive that they think that these things are being used as cover. it's unbelievable, like the whole thing is.

Roughage Crew (Enrique), Thursday, 27 July 2006 11:48 (nineteen years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.