HYPOTHETICAL Middle East Scenario

[jessiecat]

Ten pints, and a can of kestrel in the shower. However thats a distinctly western pastime - so I really think it was the kebab and the pure anti-semitic sentiment emanating from the local mosque that provoked my outburst.

Good thing it wasn't scrumpy cider. Sometimes I can pick up the vibes from the mosque in Plymouth 20 miles away. When the wind is right that is.

 

[BasketCase]

What's more shocking than irradiating a large parts of the city, scaring tens of thousands of people?

DUDE. How do you even know the city has been irradiated???

Seriously, think it through. City governments don't have geiger counters on standby at every street corner to detect a dirty bomb. Most people don't even have radon detectors in their own house. And then, when a person gets radiation poisoning, they don't go "HOLY CRAAAAAAP" and they don't run from their house in screaming terror. They go "uh-oh" and they take a month to die. That's worthless to Hamas.

Terrorism, as the name implies, is about using terror to force your enemy to make concessions.

You really have absolutely no idea what terror is, do you? Fear, yes. That one's easy. But you get that simply from hopping on a roller coaster.

Fear is something that motivates; it's a survival instinct that's trying to get you to remove or avoid the thing that's scaring you. Fear keeps us alive.

Terror doesn't motivate; it paralyzes. It grips you and squeezes you until you can't breathe. It robs you of your mind, takes away the one thing that sets human beings above the animals.

Next time a CNN cameraman catches some video of a bombing scene, sit down and actually WATCH it for once. Take a look at faces. Faces of people fleeing for their lives. Panicked mobs jamming the streets. That's terror. And irradiating a city doesn't do that kind of thing.

In fact, you might go look up a few articles on the Chernobyl accident; the Russian government covered it up. After the first explosion, people were told only that there had been "an accident" and radiation was never mentioned. And there's the important bit right there--nobody knew it was a radiological accident until later. That's no good for a terrorist. Now, a good old basic rocket? That goes BOOM. You can't cover that up. That's what terrorists care about--dirty bombs are worthless to them.

Well, most of the loud critics of Israel are just as hypocritical as the Arabs who claim to care about Palestinians, while they only use them as a tool to keep the West under constant pressure.

True. But the general point I was driving at is that those people are critics, and critics only. All talk and no action. The main reason Israel does what it pleases and ignores the international community is because the international community is not willing to actually deploy troops and shoot people. And Israel knows it.


You and I seem to be in agreement that the incident would give Israel a lot of leeway to blow stuff up and shoot people; where we disagree is on the fact that your scenario will never actually happen.

Usually I avoid talking in absolutes like that, but I'm gonna make an exception here. If a radiological attack were feasible to a terrorist, they would have done it a long time ago. There have been one or two chemical attacks such as that one with sarin in Japan--I will point out that very few such attacks have ever occurred, and you're on your own from there.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Regardless of which was better or worse, it was only by a small degree, and both were scumbags. In essence, the Russians had a Hitler. And the Serbs had Milosevic.

I consider Stalin in a whole different class then Hitler because Stalin didn't kill everyone of a certein race etc. and he did rebuilt his nation, and made it become a super power. Milosevic ehh, perhaps, but that doesn't explain the rest of the Balkans and Serbia before Milosevic.

You think the average russian-georgian-ukrainian citizen could've done anything to stop Stalin? No, and if they spoke out, they'd be killed. Ounce war started they were drafted most likely against there will. I don't know why people like you don't see that.

The difference is i doubt a whole chunk of people equal to the amount of Germany hated Stalin. There was a thread not to long on here talking about Stalin as the 3rd greatest Russian or something.

Hitler did not sprung out of nowhere, Germany as a State and as people were all responsible for the Shoa. Blaming all the Holocaust on one person ie Hitler is the first step towards negationism.

And how is the average man in Bavaria or Rhineland responsible for the holocaust?

see above. The nazi were not ET coming form Vega.

Well the Germans who performed the holocaust were most likely under orders to do so, or were actually nazi's.

Pre-Potsdam deportations (May - July 1945)

In 1945, the former eastern territories of Germany (most of Silesia, Pomerania, East Brandenburg, and East-Prussia) were occupied by Polish and Russian military forces. Early expulsions in Poland were undertaken by the Polish Communist military authorities[22] even before the Potsdam Conference ("wild expulsions"). To ensure territorial incorporation into Poland, Polish Communists ordered that Germans were to be expelled: "We must expel all the Germans because countries are built on national lines and not on multinational ones," a citation from the Plenum of the Central Committee of the Polish Workers Party, May 20-21, 1945.[23] Germans were defined as either Reichsdeutsche, people enlisted in 1st or 2nd Volksliste groups, and those of the 3rd group, who held German citizenship.

The early expulsions were often more brutal than the organized population transfer that came afterwards. Sources suggest that the expulsions in Poland were not as brutal as those in Czechoslovakia.[24] However, one source, Russians in Germany states that, according to a Soviet soldier: "Polish soldiers relate to German women as to free booty".[25]

Hmmm, i see the words "Polish Communist" Alot in there, so you proved yourself wrong.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Spoiler Winner don't read! It's scary! :

Western european countries compared to Eastern ones have a larger minority of about any ethnic group: we have more muslims, more vietnameze, more chineze, more tibetain. We also have more jews if we want to relate to the religions of the ME. France not only has the biggest muslim population in Europe but also the biggest jewish population. So your correlation works also if you apply it to the buddist minority or even the jewish



What the hell is bohudík! ? let me guess: not yet? thank God?

And again France, Britain and other Western European countries do have a large Jewish minorities: France alone has above half a million. So if we follow your logic, the more jews a country has the less support its government shows toward Israel !!!

Yeah right, tell that to Le Pen. Every pulic poll done in France shows that the minority that the french "fears" more is the arab one, don't talk about what do not know, OK?

the blooody Swede, how dare they send humanutarian aid to people in need I knew that those nordist have lost their well-guided humanitarian ideals since the Vikings




Now, really the reason are the following:

1. Eastern Europe tend to side with the US adminsitration and against Russia when it come to extra european affairs due to recent history . On the Israel/Palestine conflict they side with the US thus they are more pro-Israel.
2. Eastern Europe tend to have more anti islam feelings because of Turkey, because of the recent Yoguslavia conflict etc.
3. Eastern European tend to be more tolerant with human right abuses, war crimes and brutal methods in general. You just can't erase 50 years of KGB, Securitate and other "sweet" communist methods in just 2 decades.

Remember, he can't see you, your a ghost!

 

[Dachs]

I consider Stalin in a whole different class then Hitler because Stalin didn't kill everyone of a certein race etc. and he did rebuilt his nation, and made it become a super power.

You disproved yourself with the quoted Wikipedia article on the evictions and murders of Germans in Prussia and Silesia.

Milosevic ehh, perhaps, but that doesn't explain the rest of the Balkans and Serbia before Milosevic.

Who cares about explaining them? I'm just giving an example of a Serbian Hitler.

 

[TheLastOne36]

You disproved yourself with the quoted Wikipedia article on the evictions and murders of Germans in Prussia and Silesia.

Yes Stalin was there to kill every single German in the world.

Who cares about explaining them? I'm just giving an example of a Serbian Hitler.

And yes because of that it excuses an entire nations history before him.

---

Anyway your arguement is that Central Europeans have a mindset that approves genocide, the only thing that ever happened in Central Europe that was anywhere near that (excluding WWII and foreign rulers from outside of Central Europe) was when Poland took over Prussia during the 1400's.

 

[Dachs]

Yes Stalin was there to kill every single German in the world.

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group

I've got balls of steel.

And yes because of that it excuses an entire nations history before him.

All I was doing was giving an example, not arguing on one side or another.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Still i don't think Stalin meant to move them just because they were Germans. If they were French or Dutch or Romanian the same thing would've happened. While Hitler on the other hand...
---
But otherwise, Central Europe has a very clean history when it comes to Genocide and all that, compared to the likes of the Balkans, Eastern Europe. I was pointing out that HannibalBarca was wrong.

I don't know if it is cultural or genetic or the land is too crowded, but it is weird all this fascination people in Central Europe have with genocide, mass murder, forced sterilization and ethnic cleansing

 

[Dachs]

Still i don't think Stalin meant to move them just because they were Germans. If they were French or Dutch or Romanian the same thing would've happened.

It was because they were Germans. Otherwise the Germans could make trouble about wanting to get their stuff back, and we wouldn't want that. That messes up the nice clean postwar communist order that Stalin had going behind his iron curtain. Doesn't matter if it would have happened to anybody else; it didn't.

 

[TheLastOne36]

i meant as in let's say France was where Germany was and huge French population lived in Poland at the time. Same thing would've happened.

 

[Dachs]

i meant as in let's say France was where Germany was and huge French population lived in Poland at the time. Same thing would've happened.

Let's say that instead of Jews, Zoroastrians had had their role in European history...as the stereotypical moneylenders and rich persons, as outcasts of a slightly different ethnic and religious variety, and received the blame for the death of Jesus. They would've faced the same kind of hatred...what's your point? We're getting massively off track here into useless irrelevancies, I think.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Still i don't think Stalin meant to move them just because they were Germans. If they were French or Dutch or Romanian the same thing would've happened. While Hitler on the other hand...

Do you believe that if there hadn't been Jews in Israel, but for instance Dutch, the situation would have been much different? I don't. Hamas would have been fighting dirty Dutch catholic colonialists and have been pointing to history to justify their actions.

 

[HannibalBarka]

And how is the average man in Bavaria or Rhineland responsible for the holocaust?
Well the Germans who performed the holocaust were most likely under orders to do so, or were actually nazi's.

The usual defense "we had orders" "we knew nothing". Germany as a state paid/is paying Israel and many jewish organization billions of dollars because of the Holocaust and you're saying it was Hitler's fault. Almost Every German Chancellar appologized in the name of the German people for the Shoa and you are still saying "it was an accident, Germans weren't lucky to have this man as their leader, ther are innocent, it only his fault. Tanzanians would have committed the Shoa if Hitler's mom migrated there before his birth".
If you think so, than I honestly can't help you.

Hmmm, i see the words "Polish Communist" Alot in there, so you proved yourself wrong.

Yeah I see the word "Polish Communist" indeed. You remind me the turkish pseudo-argument about the Armenian genocide: it wasn't us, it were the Ottoman

 

[HannibalBarka]

Remember, he can't see you, your a ghost!

I do not really care. My concern is to show the posters the fallacies in his "argument". If he is scared to argue with me, it's not my problem
Are you his "speaker"?

 

[jessiecat]

I do not really care. My concern is to show the posters the fallacies in his "argument". If he is scared to argue with me, it's not my problem
Are you his "speaker"?

Is your avatar for real? If so, you can be a ghost for me anytime or anything else you choose luv.

Seriously I could never put people like Winner, Eco, Pat and Pann on ignore. They make me laugh too much.

 

[TheLastOne36]

Let's say that instead of Jews, Zoroastrians had had their role in European history...as the stereotypical moneylenders and rich persons, as outcasts of a slightly different ethnic and religious variety, and received the blame for the death of Jesus. They would've faced the same kind of hatred...what's your point? We're getting massively off track here into useless irrelevancies, I think.

Wow, i did not meant it like that. I didn't say their role's were switched, just that the people were switched. For example, if the French were in Stalins way in Danzig and Western Silesia, the same thing would've happened, but these French remained French and not German.

Do you believe that if there hadn't been Jews in Israel, but for instance Dutch, the situation would have been much different? I don't. Hamas would have been fighting dirty Dutch catholic colonialists and have been pointing to history to justify their actions.

I wasn't argueing that, and that was completely random, and yes they would be fighting the dutch because they would be taken their land as well.

The usual defense "we had orders" "we knew nothing". Germany as a state paid/is paying Israel and many jewish organization billions of dollars because of the Holocaust and you're saying it was Hitler's fault. Almost Every German Chancellar appologized in the name of the German people for the Shoa and you are still saying "it was an accident, Germans weren't lucky to have this man as their leader, ther are innocent, it only his fault. Tanzanians would have committed the Shoa if Hitler's mom migrated there before his birth".
If you think so, than I honestly can't help you.

Well Germany as a state has/d to apologize over their actions, which were controlled by Hitler. If Nazism/Hitler never existed then i don't think the Shoa would've happened, i still think that WWII would've but their wouldn't be any holocaust. Germany committed the crime, but it was under Hitler's orders.

Yeah I see the word "Polish Communist" indeed. You remind me the turkish pseudo-argument about the Armenian genocide: it wasn't us, it were the Ottoman

It should be renamed "Russians disguised as Polish Communist" Russians were controlling us if you didn't know, this was answered two pages ago by a non-pole:

But he's doing it because these Polish forces mentioned in clear-text means "Polish military formations outfitted and trained by the Soviet army, under the control of Moscow's political puppets".

Stalin unilaterally broke off all contact with the Polish government-in-exile in London already in 1943. Stalin didn't just claim to have been unable to support the Polish Home Army's 1944 uprising, as it was liquidated by the German occupiers, he actively prohibited the British from trying to bring in support through Soviet airfields. The Soviet Union simply did not recognise any political power in Poland except the Communist one it had itself imposed.

Nothing moved or acted in Soviet occupied Poland and Germany in 1945 except at the say-so of Stalin.

 

[Dachs]

Wow, i did not meant it like that. I didn't say their role's were switched, just that the people were switched.

That's exactly what I said. Reading comprehension is plus.

 

[TheLastOne36]

"as the stereotypical moneylenders and rich persons"

You replaced their role with the jewish role, for example if Romanians were there instead of Germany, they instead of celebrating Oktoberfest would be getting tourists to see dracula's castle. The People, Their way of life, religion culture language etc stays the same. But whatever it was just 1 example which spewed of an offtopic discussion about something offtopic which was offtopic in the first place...