Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Israelo-Palestinian Conflict: 2023 Edition

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

I always thought the other branches of the Abrahamic religions held animosity toward the Jews because of their status as ‘the Chosen’ coupled with an arrogance that allows for questioning/debating the Word. Christians and Muslims take a more submissive posture and see sin in disobedience, that and the deicide thing.

The more secular nature of modernity carried with it the ancient resentments. Jews being a minority among the people and places they dispersed to and the insistence on not assimilating on the religious level lead to an easy identification of ‘others’ against the social background that it is almost natural they would become identified targets of jealousy and hatred.

So yeah , Jewish behavior causes antisemitism,  but is it their fault ? As a ‘gentile’ I always admired their spunkiness. I mean c’mon , the ruler of the Universe actually comes to you and lays out the rules and your answer is to be like ‘are you sure about that?’.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2024 at 6:43 PM, whYNOT said:

st. "Behavior" per group is a hard one to pin down, it's logic that every group has its obnoxious to likable to admirable folk, and one can't fault "the group". Or conclude that one person ~defines~ the group. The Jews seem to be "out there" and more successful, so many esp. Lefties in politics, media, academia and entertainment are annoying, I admit. The *ethnic* non religious Jews-by-birth who have been and would at present again be identified, targeted and violated by racist, anti-semites--for having no more than a Jewish name? As would be the many ethnic Jewish intellectuals who are well-represented in Objectivism. One Alissa Zinovievna Rosenbaum? I think it's more that Jews are made keenly aware early on of their small and vulnerable tribe's repressed history and know there forever will be prejudices against them, individually and collectively, making them be convenient go-to culprits for outsiders' failures, varying only in how covert or overt the prejudice is. The effect, often one of acute sensitivity to others, over-compensation or pushiness.

Jews_leave_Guatemala.thumb.png.c3cd5b6008e44732b6e1298dbf8f41e1.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Grames said:

Jews_leave_Guatemala.thumb.png.c3cd5b6008e44732b6e1298dbf8f41e1.png


 The comment:  "Let that sink in". This sort of story purports to show that Jews are not accepted  - anywhere, by even the most primitive people.

Either disseminated as part of the anti-Jewish propaganda campaign that's gone global, or sympathetic to their plight - I don't know.

For certain, unlike Muslims and maybe Christians, they would not force or proselytize their religion on the locals.

But you illogically want to define a collective by an individual and/or by a splinter group of the Orthodox in Guatemala. This tells nothing about general, Jewish "behavior"- instead: self-determination. (Reminds me of the libertarian group who tried settling in Costa Rica).

Anyone who spent time in Israel could report on how divergent are the Jews there, in behavior and opinions. Secular v. religious is just one angle. Freedom of opinion is secure. 

Try reports from Iran on the hair-raising monolithic controls and punishments meted out by that regime on citizens,  if you want to see submissive behavior.

Beyond Hamas, Iran, in every way, is Israel's primary foe and opposite. And Iran is the main enemy of the Western Enlightenment, knowing free-ish Israel is its closest threat but not its main one.

Whatever one's (irrelevant) feeling-perceptions about Jews, a little moral support is called for here for Israel, in the interests of (moral) justice. The quibbles and skepticism about its politics, religion and so on, are - also - undermining the free West and playing into the enemies hands.

The "Pro-Palestinians" screaming about 'genocide' should be told that we know what they are advocating - the ethnic cleansing of Israel - and told exactly which illiberal and cruel theocracy they are ultimately supporting and cravenly trying to appease, that would discard or murder them as easily as they would the Zionists. . . .

 

Edited by whYNOT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SpookyKitty said:

I don't do charity and I don't owe you anything.

I asked you a clarification about a claim of yours.

Providing a clarification it is not charity, is a mandatory element of a rational debate.

But I can understand why you refuse to do it.

But don't worry, the moderation here @dream_weaver doesn't enforce this, as showed in @whYNOT's case in a Ukraine thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, AlexL said:

I asked you a clarification about a claim of yours.

Providing a clarification it is not charity, is a mandatory element of a rational debate.

But I can understand why you refuse to do it.

But don't worry, the moderation here @dream_weaver doesn't enforce this, as showed in @whYNOT's case in a Ukraine thread.

What do you mean by "a" Alex?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, SpookyKitty said:

What do you mean by "a" Alex?

How is this similar to my question?

My question was:

can you please show - based solely on his [Ben-Gvir's] words - why this man's arguments mean specifically "ethnic cleansing".

(I also gave you Wiki's definition of ethnic cleansing.)

My question is in no way similar to yours above. Are you trying to dodge by getting insolent, taking advantage of the lack of moderation by @dream_weaver on this forum?

Edited by AlexL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, AlexL said:

How is this similar to my question?

My question was:

can you please show - based solely on his [Ben-Gvir's] words - why this man's arguments mean specifically "ethnic cleansing".

(I also gave you Wiki's definition of ethnic cleansing.)

My question is in no way similar to yours above. Are you trying to dodge by getting insolent, taking advantage of the lack of moderation by @dream_weaver on this forum?

I can't answer your question if I don't know what you mean by "a". Please clarify.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SpookyKitty said:

I can't answer your question if I don't know what you mean by "a". Please clarify.

Why can't you answer my question if you don't know what I mean by "a" ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, AlexL said:

Go away☹

Take @whYNOT with you and say hello to @dream_weaver for me.

How does my presence and input on this thread deserve such a harsh rejection? ;)

Has what I argued in -objective- defense of Israel offended you?

These constant personal references to others. Leave me (and D_W) out of it.

Maybe it is you who should retire from the discussion, with whoever is prompting your slurs. You certainly have added no value, just negations without validation.

 "The second-hander acts, but the source of his actions is scattered in every other living person. It’s everywhere and nowhere and you can’t reason with him. He’s not open to reason".

 

Edited by whYNOT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, whYNOT said:

Has what I argued in defense of Israel offended you?

No, it was you irrational way of arguing that disgusted me. And is was not about the present thread/subject: I specified previously what thread/subject was it about:

17 hours ago, AlexL said:

as showed in @whYNOT's case in an Ukraine thread.

 

Edited by AlexL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll state my position for the last time: there are necessary and moral wars and inessential, avoidable ~and sacrificial~ wars.

The rational person or government knows the difference, and will go to lengths to prevent hostilities and their consequences.

Rational-value priorities: "This" is not worth ... "that".

I care little for what you think of my arguments against the militant posture by US and Western governments to advance, and prolong, the disastrous Ukraine war, but since argument from authority is your thing, show me how the body of Objectivism - and Rand - would have supported the gvt. actions and inactions and evasions. You can't. So shut up. Stay on topic. Leave 'personalities' out of the debate.

Edited by whYNOT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, whYNOT said:

I will state for the last time [..] what you think ...

If this is for me, please specify, for ex. by linking/replying to a comment of mine.

If this was indeed for me, please repost, but keep it brief and to the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, AlexL said:

Go away☹

Take @whYNOT with you and say hello to @dream_weaver for me.

You kept pining for my attention, miserably, in post after post and now you tell me to go away? What, you don't like it when someone argues in bad faith? You now understand why I don't talk to you. I'm glad that this now goes both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, SpookyKitty said:

you don't like it when someone argues in bad faith? You now understand why I don't talk to you. I'm glad that this now goes both ways.

Both ways !!! 🤣🤣🤣

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not for the first time, a response to belligerence, the forceful reaction to force-initiation, or preventive, self-defensive, military actions--have been causally twisted to turn the real victims into the aggressor, the aggressor into the victim. Maybe -  on the basis of the last committed and most recent or present 'force' broadcast today, is the only one of significance (to the short-attention-span challenged, i.e., concretists.

The northern Hezbollah offensive was intended to be coordinated with Oct 7.

Hezbollah (and Hamas) wouldn't be propagating such nonsense if it had not been shown to be effective on large numbers of indoctrinated fools.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20295/lebanon-hosts-terrorists

Edited by whYNOT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Approx 9,000 Hamas dead (IDF reported numbers) out of the total 22,000+ (Gazan-Hamas ministry of health recently reported).

 "Collateral damage" - 40:60 per cent.

Some say that's (deliberate) "genocide", not even close. That is how to defeat urban terrorists at minimal cost to others.

With Hamas placing/forcing civilians into the firing line - cannon fodder to gain worldwide sympathy and for terrorists' self-protection from the IDF soldiers - the figures should be worse. Such irony. For the war they induced, and their inhumane abuses of their Gazan civilians, it is for Hamas that their noisy support in other nations is demanding "humanitarian" relief!

So a decision of the Hague to pressure the IDF into 'humanely' halting their invasion is crucial, or the Hamas killers still alive realize, they are on borrowed time.

And pandering, self-righteous South Africans lead the way. A new term enters law, "genocidal rhetoric". Words kill? Rhetoric legally demonstrates intent?

At those Israeli pols who stupidly and publicly shoot off their mouths.

Not here:

"You wanted hell, you'll get hell".

Who is that logically and justly aimed at?--Hamas, naturally. No indication here of genocidal intent on Gazans at large.

https://www.jpost.com/israel-hamas-war/article-781705

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by whYNOT
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/11/2024 at 6:44 PM, SpookyKitty said:

Full video of South Africa's case against Israel at the ICJ: <...>

Obviously you did not post this in order to inform the readers about the SA's arguments. You posted it because you support and endorse them, otherwise you would have posted Israel's (counter)arguments too...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, AlexL said:

Obviously you did not post this in order to inform the readers about the SA's arguments. You posted it because you support and endorse them, otherwise you would have posted Israel's (counter)arguments too...

How about you go and inform yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, SpookyKitty said:

How about you go and inform yourself.

I did, don't worry. I don't suspect you of objectivity and I expect nothing from you.

I merely noted your misconceived militancy - your support and endorsement of SA's pro-Hamas "arguments". 

Edited by AlexL
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...