So why exactly is Israeli slaughtering protesters?

[loinburger]

I know who Isaac and Ishmael are, and they are 100% irrelevant. Only a complete idiot would use them to justify a "religious" conflict that is relatively new.

[loinburger]

How many Muslims kill Jews because of Isaac? How many Jews kill Muslims because of Ishmael? Zero. You're just trying to rationalize your ignorance of history with a simplistic Biblical justification for your bigotry.

If the Isaac/Ishmael split is as important as you claim, then why were the Jews and Muslims at peace for centuries?

[Docfeelgood]

How many Muslims kill Jews because of Isaac? How many Jews kill Muslims because of Ishmael? Zero. You're just trying to rationalize your ignorance of history with a simplistic Biblical justification for your bigotry.

If the Isaac/Ishmael split is as important as you claim, then why were the Jews and Muslims at peace for centuries?

I am done with you till you read up on it. then we will discuss

[Docfeelgood]

I know who Isaac and Ishmael are, and they are 100% irrelevant. Only a complete idiot would use them to justify a "religious" conflict that is relatively new.

truth scare you?
BTW
thousands of years, not new

[loinburger]

While you're waiting, try reading up on some real history for a change.

[Docfeelgood]

One man.
Two Women.
Pregnancy and Birth.
Jealousy.
Holy Wars thousands of years later.

short for dummies

[SlowwHand]

Isaac is important in religion, period.

Islamic views
Main article: Islamic view of Isaac

Isaac (Arabic:إسحٰق, Ishaq) is revered by Muslims to be a prophet and the patriarch of Islam. Isaac, along with Ishmael, is highly important for Muslims for continuing to preach the message of monotheism after his father Abraham. Among Isaac's children was the follow-up Israelite patriarch Jacob, who too is venerated an Islamic prophet.

Isaac is mentioned fifteen times by name in the Qur'an, often with his father and his son, Jacob.[36] The Qur'an states that Abraham received "good tidings of Isaac, a prophet, of the righteous", and that God blessed them both (XXXVII: 12). In a fuller description, when angels came to Abraham to tell him of the future punishment to be imposed on Sodom and Gomorrah, his wife, Sarah, "laughed, and We gave her good tidings of Isaac, and after Isaac of (a grandson) Jacob" (XI: 71-74); and it is further explained that this event will take place despite Abraham and Sarah's old age. Several verses speak of Isaac as a "gift" to Abraham (VI: 84; XIX: 49-50), and XXIX: 26-27 adds that God made "prophethood and the Book to be among his offspring", which has been interpreted to refer to Abraham's two prophetic sons, his prophetic grandson Jacob, and his prophetic great-grandson Joseph. In the Qur'an, it later narrates that Abraham also praised God for giving him Ishmael and Isaac in his old age (XIV: 39-41).

Elsewhere in the Qur'an, Isaac is mentioned in lists: Joseph follows the religion of his forefathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob (XII: 38) and speaks of God's favor to them (XII: 6); Jacob's sons all testify their faith and promise to worship the God that their forefathers, "Abraham, Ishmael and Isaac", worshiped (II: 127); and the Qur'an commands Muslims to believe in the revelations that were given to "Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob and the Patriarchs" (II: 136; III: 84). In the Qur'an's narrative of Abraham's near-sacrifice of his son (XXXVII: 102), the name of the son is not mentioned and debate has continued over the son's identity, though many feel that the identity is the least important element in a story which is given to show the courage that one develops through faith.[37]

[Zevico]

This exchange between doc and loin is useless.

I think this is an interesting remark by Asher:

HC's view of the Israel-Palestine situation:

Israel: Righteous, valiant protectors of holiness and goodness. Innocent settlers under constant attack by insurgents that just hate Jewish people and want to slaughter them all.

Palestine: Heathens, insurgents. All wish for every Jew to die and will stop at nothing to ethnically cleanse the region of jews.

He would think it has nothing to do with land disputes.

HC's view of the Israel-Palestine situation

I'm not HC, but I think it's fairly clear that your understanding of his views is more or less at the level of a picturebook. The implication, of course, is that your understanding of the Israeli narrative is simplistic.

Israel: Righteous, valiant protectors of holiness and goodness. Innocent settlers under constant attack by insurgents that just hate Jewish people and want to slaughter them all.

Israel is not holy and it is not diabolical either. Evidently, it is difficult for you grasp that Israelis and settlers are human beings rather than the products of your bizarre assumptions.

Palestine: Heathens, insurgents.

Another nonsense. Heathens? What, exactly, is their heresy? Let's go back to HC for a minute: has he actually said anything about Palestinians being heathens? About Jews being "righteous"? You have a tendency to read into others posts things that simply aren't there.

All [Palestinians] wish for every Jew to die and will stop at nothing to ethnically cleanse the region of jews.

Another interesting post. It says a great deal about your understanding of the conflict, though it has little relationship with any reasoned analysis of the history of the conflict--probably because it does not stem from any such analysis. Tell me, Asher: where do you get this strange view of HC's opinions? Is it the vibe? Did you wet your finger, touch it to the wind and decide that it must be so?

He would think it has nothing to do with land disputes.

Another nonsense. This has everything to do with land disputes. It is my contention that the land dispute concerns the entirety of what is currently the state of Israel; and that it also includes the West Bank and Gaza. My contention is evidenced in the public statements, views and policies of Fatah and Hamas, the two major political parties and movements supported by the Palestinians. When Fatah-owned media declares that the destruction of Israel is it's goal, I believe that over flowery statements to the UN in English. When Fatah-owned media broadcasts the Protocols of Zion, I take it that Fatah's Central Committee wants its people to believe that Jews are evil. When Hamas' foreign minister describes Jews as a 'killer people' and thereby justifies their expulsions in the medieval ages, the genocide committed upon them by the Nazis--a genocide Hamas simultaneously denies--I take Hamas at its word. What that means is that whether settlements expand or retract will not affect the existence of the conflict.

[Asher]

This exchange between doc and loin is useless.

I think this is an interesting remark by Asher:



I'm not HC, but I think it's fairly clear that your understanding of his views is more or less at the level of a picturebook. The implication, of course, is that your understanding of the Israeli narrative is simplistic.

You completely missed the point. My point is HC's understanding of the issue is more or less at the level of a picturebook. DFG is in the same boat.

Israel is not holy and it is not diabolical either. Evidently, it is difficult for you grasp that Israelis and settlers are human beings rather than the products of your bizarre assumptions.

What the **** are you talking about? Of course they are human beings. I'm not saying they are diabolical. I'm saying they're human beings, so they're petty like everyone else. They want the land, they refuse to give it up. They kill because they were killed. The Palestinians respond in kind. I'm saying they're more alike than they are different. I'm saying the situation isn't as simple as "Arabs hate Jews, thus conflict" which is the level of most pro-Israeli understanding.

I have a hard time believing you are a lawyer in real life. This is ridiculous. Not even responding to the rest of your post, it's so out to lunch...FWIW, HC is the one who brought up ethnic cleansing. Which is what prompted that post to begin with -- HC's assertions that the Palestinians kill as part of ethnic cleansing, while the Israelis clearly just killed in "self-defense". It's absurd and it's sad that you cannot recognize that, either.

[C0ckney]

zevico is a lawyer? really? i feel sorry for his clients if that's the way he argues a case.

[Asher]

I may be mistaken, but I'm pretty sure he mentioned being a lawyer once.

[MrFun]

I am done with you till you read up on it. then we will discuss

Ah, sweet irony . . . .

[Zevico]

You completely missed the point. My point is HC's understanding of the issue is more or less at the level of a picturebook. DFG is in the same boat.

You presented a picture-book view of their opinions, without founding that "picture book view" in their posts ("the evidence"). I discerned no such "picture book view" in their posts. My conclusion, therefore, is that you assumed that you knew their views without referring to them.

What the **** are you talking about? Of course they are human beings.

If someone is "righteous", it means that they are not just "human" but divinely inspired. Touched by God or the Gods. You assume that HC thinks Israelis are "righteous" but you've no offered no proof of the same and none is apparent in this thread. Mind, this is not true in every context; but it is true when you present the righteous in contrast with the heathen.

Put more simply, in your depiction HC thinks Israelis are "essentially and always" in the right and Palestinians are "essentially and always" wrong. But you haven't actually offered proof to back that up. It's just you and your imagination.

I'm not saying they are diabolical.

Good.

I'm saying they're human beings, so they're petty like everyone else. They want the land, they refuse to give it up.

Still on the same page.

They kill because they were killed.

Stop: Hammer time.

Who is they? Israeli settlers? Israelis generally? The IDF? "All of them at once", for the same reasons? I have a hard time following that.
[/quote]

I'm saying they're more alike than they are different. I'm saying the situation isn't as simple as "Arabs hate Jews, thus conflict" which is the level of most pro-Israeli understanding.

Well, no.

First, you're making simplistic assumptions about the "pro-Israel understanding" supposedly possessed by HC. I referred to this earlier. These assumptions aren't based in fact, but in your view of what HC "should" think in light of your preconceptions. If you care to prove otherwise, you need only refer me to the posts wherein HC describes the Israelis as "righteous" or the Palestinians as "heathens."

Second, I'm making a basic argument. Fatah's propaganda organs are a good indicator of what it wants its people to believe: viz, that Jews are evil. Ditto Hamas. I infer that these statements are indicative of the policy and viewpoint of both Hamas and Fatah vis-a-vis Jews. From the fact that 90% of Palestinians voted for these groups in the election of 2006, I infer that the narratives propounded by Fatah and Hamas are so totally ordinary that they are a non-issue, or a basic truth, for most Palestinians. My inferences are based on evidence. Not assumptions and wild speculation.

As to the Israelis, it is equally possible to discern their intentions, motives and policies, if not easier because they do not suffer from the constraints of following a single (not necessarily truthful) party line associated with the political group of their choice unlike the Palestinians. One distinction between them is that the Israelis see Palestinians as human beings rather than a collective or hive-mind of conspirators that control the media, the world, and other such nonsense. In other words, they don't have an ideology that justifies the indiscriminate murder of Palestinians, whereas most Palestinians adhere to one such ideology and view it as basic common sense.

Edit:
Lastly, while most Israelis subscribe to the view that a two-state solution is desirable, they do not view it as a likely outcome. So they prefer the status quo.

By contrast, most Palestinians view a single-state (Palestine) solution as both desirable and as a likely outcome. Most view the Jewish presence in Palestine as a pestilence. That's not me talking: that's their leadership talking.

[Zevico]

[QUOTE=Asher;5977659]Not even responding to the rest of your post, it's so out to lunch...FWIW, HC is the one who brought up ethnic cleansing.

Which is what prompted that post to begin with -- HC's assertions that the Palestinians kill as part of ethnic cleansing, while the Israelis clearly just killed in "self-defense". It's absurd and it's sad that you cannot recognize that, either.

The Palestinians are undoubtedly killing Israelis in order to wipe them all out or kick them out.
The Israelis are undoubtedly engaged in "self-defence."
I certainly understand what you're saying; I simply disagree with you. I've given my reasons in the above post. If they're "out to lunch", specify why.

Huffing out without addressing the issues at hand is just bizarre. You were happy enough to draw a broad brush abou HC before. Why not back it up? "Screw you guys, I'm going home"?

[loinburger]

short for dummies

Already refuted. Read a history book.

Isaac is important in religion, period.

SlowwHand missing the the point yet again? Color me shocked. How many official statements / proclamations from Hamas or the PLO or the Palestinian Authority mention Isaac? How many from Israel?

The Palestinians are undoubtedly killing Israelis in order to wipe them all out or kick them out.
The Israelis are undoubtedly engaged in "self-defence."

How many civilian casualties do you consider to be appropriate in an "act of self-defence"? I'm not saying that the answer must be "zero" (which is ostensibly the goal but may not necessarily be the result), but there must be an upper limit past which "self-defence" becomes "vengeance."