The USA and Israel

[Immanuel Can]

A couple of notes. A reminder: this is a philosophy forum and we should have a greater respect for sound reasoning and balanced analysis than those in the *outside world*. Yet a great deal of the conversation and argument that does go on is really *partisan bickering*. We can certainly do better and the first step is trying to gain a non-biased stance. That may be hard but it is not impossible.

Ah, the "voice of reason" from the guy who's totally devoted to ad hominems and postures of feigned superiority, and cannot help running off into attempted pedantry at every opportunity, while getting most of his facts wrong. They guy who would listen to reason if it jumped up and bit him on the butt, and they guy who's so in love with his own voice that, if he were made of chocolate, he'd eat himself!

If you remotely modeled what you say, then maybe somebody would listen to you. But that won't be today, obviously. You've got some work to do, before you become "the voice of reason."

[Immanuel Can]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uxwhl0Wvh0w

Hamas members, ALL IN CIVILIAN CLOTHES, all working in a CIVILIAN area, planting bombs, as filmed by Hamas terrorists themselves.

[bahman]

Oh. So you have absolutely no workable way Israel can desist without being slaughtered. Well, that means you've got nothing to offer on that subject.

I answered that but I could not convince you.

You had no answer a sensible and moral person could possibly accept. Effectively, you're asking Israel to accept total annihilation, and you can't think of an alternative. No wonder you couldn't convince me...or them, obviously. Nobody SHOULD be convinced by such bad logic or immoral conclusions.

I didn't ask for the total annihilation of Israel. I asked that Israel defend itself within their border. I asked Israel to be open to negotiation. I asked Israel to end the occupation.

I provide a link that Hamas asked for a permanent cease-fire in exchange for the release of hostages that you ignore.

I didn't "ignore" it. I pointed out that Hamas can't be trusted, because they lie and then attack again.

So when this bloodshed is going to stop?

...you said bombs are bombs...

They are. But let's play along with your "dumb" game, there: what kind of bombs are the rockets that Hamas is still shooting into Israel?

That's right! They're the "dumbest" of all bombs...just explosives shot off in the general direction of cities, with absolutely no means to be directed to particular military targets. Hamas is shooting NOTHING BUT "dumb" bombs.

So where's that argument in relation to Hamas?

The fact that Hamas is doing something wrong does not mean Israel is allowed to do something wrong.

So in your opinion, Jesus's death was a committed suicide...

Nobody said any such thing. What are you smoking?

So Jesus died on the cross for a better good, unconditional love. I am wondering why you support Israel knowing the fact that their act is against your objective moral principle.

What I said was what you know to be true. Israel is not a Christian entity. They'll proudly tell you so themselves. How are we going to impose Christian moral values on them? What means do you have to do that?

Indeed, you cannot impose your moral values on them but you can stop supporting them. Killing is wrong whether Hamas does it or Israel.

[phyllo]

On the other hand, you and I both know that Israel is a secular state, not some kind of Christian republic. As such, nobody can possibly expect it to operate by Christian moral principles. Rather, the most we can expect of it is that it will operate by reasonable, pragmatic and secular ones. And I hope it does operate that way.

But you're not a "secular state". Yet you appear to agree with everything that Israel is doing.

You're wrong. And if you look back, you'll see I've never said or even hinted at any such thing. What I've consistently asked is simply, "What's your plan for ending the conflict without getting all the Israelis killed?" And I've seen no such plan, so far.

But if you've got one, trot it out.

Please remind me where you disagree with what Israel is doing. I must have missed it.

And I've already answered your question.

[Immanuel Can]

I answered that but I could not convince you.

You had no answer a sensible and moral person could possibly accept. Effectively, you're asking Israel to accept total annihilation, and you can't think of an alternative. No wonder you couldn't convince me...or them, obviously. Nobody SHOULD be convinced by such bad logic or immoral conclusions.

I didn't ask for the total annihilation of Israel.

But Hamas insists on it. If you allow Hamas to continue, it's what they have already told you they're going to do. Hiding your head in the sand and pretending that's not who they are will not help; and you'll never convince the Israelis that Hamas is going to do less than they've said they'll do.

I provide a link that Hamas asked for a permanent cease-fire in exchange for the release of hostages that you ignore.

I didn't "ignore" it. I pointed out that Hamas can't be trusted, because they lie and then attack again.

So when this bloodshed is going to stop?

When Hamas is gone, obviously. There's no other option: Hamas will not allow there to be. I would wish that would mean "arrested, and put before an international tribunal," but what do you think are the chances Hamas will surrender?

Some are giving up now. But too many are refusing, obviously hoping to become "martyrs." That shows you that they COULD give up, but they just won't. That's the mentality of Hamas.

...you said bombs are bombs...

They are. But let's play along with your "dumb" game, there: what kind of bombs are the rockets that Hamas is still shooting into Israel?

That's right! They're the "dumbest" of all bombs...just explosives shot off in the general direction of cities, with absolutely no means to be directed to particular military targets. Hamas is shooting NOTHING BUT "dumb" bombs.

So where's that argument in relation to Hamas?

The fact that Hamas is doing something wrong does not mean Israel is allowed to do something wrong.

No, of course not. However, it's terribly interesting that you got all wound up over Israel's "dumb" bombs, but failed even to mention that all Hamas shoots are "dumb" bombs! One would think an equitable view would certainly include both.

Why didn't you even mention it?

I am wondering why you support Israel knowing the fact that their act is against your objective moral principle.

What I "support" is the quickest solution to no more dead on either side. What do you "support"?

[Immanuel Can]

But you're not a "secular state". Yet you appear to agree with everything that Israel is doing.

You're wrong. And if you look back, you'll see I've never said or even hinted at any such thing. What I've consistently asked is simply, "What's your plan for ending the conflict without getting all the Israelis killed?" And I've seen no such plan, so far.

But if you've got one, trot it out.

Please remind me where you disagree with what Israel is doing. I must have missed it.

I've been arguing for international intervention, and Hamas's surrender. That's all I've argued for.

And I've already answered your question.

About Ukraine? No, you certainly haven't. But I know why you won't.

You realize your answer can't be made morally consistent. I would suspect, based on your Russia stand, you're willing to see Russians die, but not willing to see Israel live.

[Alexis Jacobi]

A couple of notes. A reminder: this is a philosophy forum and we should have a greater respect for sound reasoning and balanced analysis than those in the *outside world*. Yet a great deal of the conversation and argument that does go on is really *partisan bickering*. We can certainly do better and the first step is trying to gain a non-biased stance. That may be hard but it is not impossible.

Ah, the "voice of reason" from the guy who's totally devoted to ad hominems and postures of feigned superiority, and cannot help running off into attempted pedantry at every opportunity, while getting most of his facts wrong. They guy who would listen to reason if it jumped up and bit him on the butt, and they guy who's so in love with his own voice that, if he were made of chocolate, he'd eat himself!

If you remotely modeled what you say, then maybe somebody would listen to you. But that won't be today, obviously. You've got some work to do, before you become "the voice of reason."

You have been exposed, and time and time again, in clear prose and everyone who reads here -- even your *unlikely ally* Veggie -- sees that. The one who does not see it, cannot see it, and won't admit it is of course your fine self.

As to ad hominems I will repeat again: you are an idiot (you can interpret that to be 'in the Greek sense' if you wish!) and you are a Christian Zionist fanatic. These things in my view -- others may differ -- are severe defects. As such you are a danger. The you I refer to is a you-plural. Projection, fanaticism, mistaken religious zealousness -- all of these are very real and very harmful defects that I note in you. It seems that others here do too. But I only speak for myself.

That is, in the man we know as Immanuel Can has these various traits and characteristics and these can be noted and talked about. However, these defects are shared among millions of those who *reason* (quote/unquote) like you do. My view? This is like being caught in a sort of socio-religious mass hysteria.

It is entirely fair to use hard terms to describe people like this. Therefore it is not ad hominem as you take that to mean. It is more like honest realism.

I assert that the perspective I have and indeed my *intellectual methods*, are indeed and beyond doubt superior to yours. You reason at the level of a child. And you are invested in twisted fanatico-religious views that are by their very nature irrational. Therefore, you avoid responding to any valid points I make. That is your strategy.

As to getting facts wrong -- there you are bluffing. You have no response to those things I have pointed out to you and to forum readership about what your core motivations are. And you have not and indeed cannot answer any of the points I have made.

All those points stand.

[bahman]

You had no answer a sensible and moral person could possibly accept. Effectively, you're asking Israel to accept total annihilation, and you can't think of an alternative. No wonder you couldn't convince me...or them, obviously. Nobody SHOULD be convinced by such bad logic or immoral conclusions.

I didn't ask for the total annihilation of Israel.

But Hamas insists on it. If you allow Hamas to continue, it's what they have already told you they're going to do. Hiding your head in the sand and pretending that's not who they are will not help; and you'll never convince the Israelis that Hamas is going to do less than they've said they'll do.

But you don't think that Hamas can annihilate Israel. Do you?

I didn't "ignore" it. I pointed out that Hamas can't be trusted, because they lie and then attack again.

So when this bloodshed is going to stop?

When Hamas is gone, obviously. There's no other option: Hamas will not allow there to be. I would wish that would mean "arrested, and put before an international tribunal," but what do you think are the chances Hamas will surrender?

Some are giving up now. But too many are refusing, obviously hoping to become "martyrs." That shows you that they COULD give up, but they just won't. That's the mentality of Hamas.

OK, so you are supporting Israel's position.

They are. But let's play along with your "dumb" game, there: what kind of bombs are the rockets that Hamas is still shooting into Israel?

That's right! They're the "dumbest" of all bombs...just explosives shot off in the general direction of cities, with absolutely no means to be directed to particular military targets. Hamas is shooting NOTHING BUT "dumb" bombs.

So where's that argument in relation to Hamas?

The fact that Hamas is doing something wrong does not mean Israel is allowed to do something wrong.

No, of course not. However, it's terribly interesting that you got all wound up over Israel's "dumb" bombs, but failed even to mention that all Hamas shoots are "dumb" bombs! One would think an equitable view would certainly include both.

Why didn't you even mention it?

I already mentioned. I don't support Hamas.

I am wondering why you support Israel knowing the fact that their act is against your objective moral principle.

What I "support" is the quickest solution to no more dead on either side. What do you "support"?
[/quote]
I support none of them but peace.

[phyllo]

I've been arguing for international intervention, and Hamas's surrender. That's all I've argued for.

You've been arguing for Hamas to surrender. No doubt about that.

As for "international intervention"... I must have missed those posts.

About Ukraine? No, you certainly haven't. But I know why you won't.

You realize your answer can't be made morally consistent. I would suspect, based on your Russia stand, you're willing to see Russians die, but not willing to see Israel live.

The topic is Israel/Palestine/Gaza.

I'm not talking about Ukraine. It's off-topic.

I already said what Israel ought to do.

Stop the offensive.
Get the hostages back.
Let in water, food and medicine.
Get to work on a permanent solution.

[accelafine]

A lot of Jew-haters on this website. Immanuel Can is holding them off virtually single-handedly. What does this say about the human condition?
He's also doing it effortlessly. That speaks volumes about which side has the truth in its corner. The truth is effortless when it comes to arguments.

ps Could someone enlighten me on this question? Are Jew-haters 'for' or 'against' Ukraine? I'm not sure which one suits their Jew-hating agenda. An answer would be appreciated. Genuine question. Thank you.

[promethean75]

u guys still tryna figure out a conventional solution to a war between two theocratic capitalist nations fighting over a piece of land each believes they have a sovereign right to becuz of something said by some passive-aggressive crackpot with a messianic complex who was probably high on something (or drunk) thousands of years ago?

i would lol but this truly is tragic. the solution would be for the jewish and palestinian working class to unionize together and immediately halt their production, and hence their contribution, to the war industry and its machinations in the middle east.

printing up leaflets of Lafargue's 'The Right to be Lazy' and dropping them from airplanes over israel and palestine is whatchu need to do.

other than that, none of you pro-israel asshats will ever, ever, ever convince Hamas, the palestinian people, or their supporters that palestians should not be outraged by the Balfour Declaration and the events that transpired thereafter. never ever ever.

[accelafine]

u guys still tryna figure out a conventional solution to a war between two theocratic capitalist nations fighting over a piece of land each believes they have a sovereign right to becuz of something said by some passive-aggressive crackpot with a messianic complex who was probably high on something (or drunk) thousands of years ago?

i would lol but this truly is tragic. the solution would be for the jewish and palestinian working class to unionize together and immediately halt their production, and hence their contribution, to the war industry and its machinations in the middle east.

printing up leaflets of Lafargue's 'The Right to be Lazy' and dropping them from airplanes over israel and palestine is whatchu need to do.

other than that, none of you pro-israel asshats will ever, ever, ever convince Hamas, the palestinian people, or their supporters that palestians should not be outraged by the Balfour Declaration and the events that transpired thereafter. never ever ever.

Moronic post of the day. I doubt if any of those people who are living there today could give a flying rat's fuck about a 'Balfour Declaration'. Countries and people are in the here and now.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Moronic post of the day.

Man, you are more ignorant about Israel than I thought. The people of Israel refer constantly to the Balfour Declaration and the ‘sliver of land conceded to us by the international community’ as their political excuse for occupation and the founding of the country. Many of course refer to the Bible and the eternal gift of Israel by the terrifying volcanic Yahweh. Others that Jews never fully left during the Exile. Yet there is always a justification story.

But it is true that there is a faction that doesn’t bother with justifications. ”We took it, the possessed it, its ours”.

Israel was an Ashkenazi project through-and-through. On one side ultra-racist and superiorist; on the other (or in combination) semi-socialist and progressive. They made the bed they lie in now.

The really horrible “Israelis” are often American transplants who are more or less openly Judeo-fascist in outlook. An Israeli friend of mine said he felt that they “ruined the country”. Israel is a socially stratified country though. There is a great deal of tension between Sephardim and Ashkenazim.

Could Palestinians and Jews now live together in the same political state and in a democratic system? Seems highly doubtful to me. But some propose that as the solution.

It really could have been different if those who initiated it could have thought ahead. Hindsight is always 20-20 as the refrain goes.

[accelafine]

Moronic post of the day.

Man, you are more ignorant about Israel than I thought. The people of Israel refer constantly to the Balfour Declaration and the ‘sliver of land conceded to us by the international community’ as their political excuse for occupation and the founding of the country. Many of course refer to the Bible and the eternal gift of Israel by the terrifying volcanic Yahweh. Others that Jews never fully left during the Exile. Yet there is always a justification story.

But it is true that there is a faction that doesn’t bother with justifications. ”We took it, the possessed it, its ours”.

Israel was an Ashkenazi project through-and-through. On one side ultra-racist and superiorist; on the other (or in combination) semi-socialist and progressive. They made the bed they lie in now.

The really horrible “Israelis” are often American transplants who are more or less openly Judeo-fascist in outlook. An Israeli friend of mine said he felt that they “ruined the country”. Israel is a socially stratified country though. There is a great deal of tension between Sephardim and Ashkenazim.

Could Palestinians and Jews now live together in the same political state and in a democratic system? Seems highly doubtful to me. But some propose that as the solution.

It really could have been different if those who initiated it could have thought ahead. Hindsight is always 20-20 as the refrain goes.

Irrelevant. All of it.

[Immanuel Can]

A couple of notes. A reminder: this is a philosophy forum and we should have a greater respect for sound reasoning and balanced analysis than those in the *outside world*. Yet a great deal of the conversation and argument that does go on is really *partisan bickering*. We can certainly do better and the first step is trying to gain a non-biased stance. That may be hard but it is not impossible.

Ah, the "voice of reason" from the guy who's totally devoted to ad hominems and postures of feigned superiority, and cannot help running off into attempted pedantry at every opportunity, while getting most of his facts wrong. They guy who would listen to reason if it jumped up and bit him on the butt, and they guy who's so in love with his own voice that, if he were made of chocolate, he'd eat himself!

If you remotely modeled what you say, then maybe somebody would listen to you. But that won't be today, obviously. You've got some work to do, before you become "the voice of reason."

You...All those points stand.

Right for the ad hom. I might have known.