1
   

Pretexts, pretexts.

 
 
Reply Tue 16 Mar, 2010 06:04 pm
So, Obama wanted a pretext to bash Israel, for some reason of his own, And, of course, Israel obliged by making that stupid announcement while Biden was there. But Obama's bashing of Israel gave Hamas a pretext for declaring another Intifada, so there is now bloodshed in the streets of Jerusalem. And so it goes, stupidity piled on to stupidity, piled on to malevolence. Obama needs a hobby to divert him from trying to be president.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,823 • Replies: 46
No top replies

 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Mar, 2010 07:44 pm
@kennethamy,
It is a president's job to pronounce moral judgements on current events; but nothing is so likely to make a philosopher look stupid, in the long run...
0 Replies
 
jgweed
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 08:03 am
@kennethamy,
To suggest that the current government of Israel by its actions is not helping the progress towards peace with its neighbors, especially Palestine, might be characterised from another perspective as not "bashing" Israel at all. While Israel enjoys US support, it cannot be a blind kind, nor should it encourage actions that are not in the best interest of the US (and of Israel itself, for that matter).
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 08:16 am
@jgweed,
jgweed;140553 wrote:
To suggest that the current government of Israel by its actions is not helping the progress towards peace with its neighbors, especially Palestine, might be characterised from another perspective as not "bashing" Israel at all. While Israel enjoys US support, it cannot be a blind kind, nor should it encourage actions that are not in the best interest of the US (and of Israel itself, for that matter).


I don't think that I suggested that Israel was, or was not, being helpful. I simply gave an analysis of what actually occurred. Obama wanted to bash Israel; Israel gave him a pretext for doing so; Obama obliged; which gave Hamas the pretext to call for another uprising (Intifada). And there is now violence. Who was being stupid and clumsy, or malevolent, I'll let others figure out.
0 Replies
 
amist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 08:41 am
@kennethamy,
Because Hamas was unaware of all of the **** Israel has been pulling recently until Obama said something about it :/
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 08:56 am
@amist,
amist;140563 wrote:
Because Hamas was unaware of all of the **** Israel has been pulling recently until Obama said something about it :/


No, but Obama's hostility against Israel gave Hamas a free pass to do what it wanted to do anyway. That is what a pretext is.
amist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 09:13 am
@kennethamy,
I think that you are seriously over estimating how important having Obama's consent is to Hamas.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 09:40 am
@amist,
amist;140569 wrote:
I think that you are seriously over estimating how important having Obama's consent is to Hamas.


I didn't say it was consent. It was an incitement, or an encouragement. And, unless it was intended as such, it was just stupidity. (Which is not unlikely).
0 Replies
 
amist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 10:14 am
@kennethamy,
Hamas doesn't need Obama to declare intifada's against Israel. It was gonna happen anyways. Seeing as how they hate America for supporting Israel and whatnot I don't think I'd be crazy to say I don't think Hamas gives two shits about whether we approve of what they do or not.
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 11:02 am
@amist,
amist;140586 wrote:
Hamas doesn't need Obama to declare intifada's against Israel. It was gonna happen anyways. Seeing as how they hate America for supporting Israel and whatnot I don't think I'd be crazy to say I don't think Hamas gives two shits about whether we approve of what they do or not.


Of course they don't. But that's not the point. Obviously they prefer to attack when Israel's relations with the United States are under great strain, as they are now, and as Obama made sure to publicize. The question is whether Obama understands the consequences of his action. It is that which is dubious.
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 11:16 am
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;140603 wrote:
Of course they don't. But that's not the point. Obviously they prefer to attack when Israel's relations with the United States are under great strain, as they are now, and as Obama made sure to publicize. The question is whether Obama understands the consequences of his action. It is that which is dubious.


There is a pattern here.

I am beginning to think, oh, here it is...

You aren't too fond of Obama!
amist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 11:24 am
@kennethamy,
Look, Israel ought to be reprimanded, at least. Their methods of dealing with this issue are approaching Col. Kurtz levels of unsound. Spades are spades, regardless of whether is empowers hamas that people call them spades or not. End of discussion.
GoshisDead
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 12:19 pm
@amist,
There is always a pattern lol
0 Replies
 
Fido
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 12:50 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;140566 wrote:
No, but Obama's hostility against Israel gave Hamas a free pass to do what it wanted to do anyway. That is what a pretext is.

Now there is a good reason to leave all Negro people unelected, and I admit it is a subtle difference from the rest of us, but their hostility is clearly clear now that you mention it, and no one could ever accuse a child of Israel of that... I say: Elect the Jews, and select the Negroes for low paying meaningless jobs, but give them rent money to pay for drugs or to their dear landlords, who may all be, for all I know, members of one tribe or another...
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 01:27 pm
@Zetherin,
Zetherin;140613 wrote:
There is a pattern here.

I am beginning to think, oh, here it is...

You aren't too fond of Obama!



It is the easiest thing in the world to be too fond of Obama.
Zetherin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 02:26 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;140644 wrote:
It is the easiest thing in the world to be too fond of Obama.


He is a great speaker, and I am fond of Obama because he entertains me. And what's wrong with expecting entertainment when you turn on the tele? Listen to one of his speeches, and you'll think you can do anything! Damn, those blurbs are motivating.

Hey, this rhymes:

"I chopped down a tree just because Obama spoke to me."

I like it, but you have to rap with it a little to get the full effect. Try it sometime.
0 Replies
 
kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 02:40 pm
@Fido,
Fido;140631 wrote:
Now there is a good reason to leave all Negro people unelected, and I admit it is a subtle difference from the rest of us, but their hostility is clearly clear now that you mention it, and no one could ever accuse a child of Israel of that... I say: Elect the Jews, and select the Negroes for low paying meaningless jobs, but give them rent money to pay for drugs or to their dear landlords, who may all be, for all I know, members of one tribe or another...


Yes. How could Obama be not loved? It must be because of race. What else could it be? After all, he won the Nobel Prize for what he did as president before he was even president. And that's a miracle.
0 Replies
 
VideCorSpoon
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 02:54 pm
@Fido,
Fido;140631 wrote:
Now there is a good reason to leave all Negro people unelected, and I admit it is a subtle difference from the rest of us, but their hostility is clearly clear now that you mention it, and no one could ever accuse a child of Israel of that... I say: Elect the Jews, and select the Negroes for low paying meaningless jobs, but give them rent money to pay for drugs or to their dear landlords, who may all be, for all I know, members of one tribe or another...

The rules about bigotry and stereotyping still apply. In case anyone may have forgotten (or more likely never read the rules), feel free to visit the "rules" link located at the bottom of this post. Fido, to give you the benefit of the doubt, you would have to clarify this post.

And for those who may not have read the bigotry and stereotyping clause of the forum rules, please read.


Bigotry and Stereotyping wrote:


Users are expected to refrain from statements that are bigoted or stereotypical. Examples of this may take many forms but is primarily concerned with unwarranted whole-group judgments of people in an insulting, derisive or negative fashion. It is based on the principle that people (each with their own individuality) make up such groups. For example the statement, "Conservatives are angry, bitter people" ignores the fact that each 'Conservative' decides his or her own behavior and may or may not be "bitter". To judge them en-mass is simply unethical. Regardless of how true someone thinks such proclamations are, posting them hamstrings the communicative process and nearly always ends in senseless bickering (which has no place in the philosophical realm).
Debate and explore controversial ideas, by all means! But do so in a fashion that:

  1. Is polite.
  2. Respects the individual differences between people -and-
  3. Refrains from condemning based upon arbitrary categorization.

kennethamy
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 02:59 pm
@VideCorSpoon,
VideCorSpoon;140677 wrote:

The rules about bigotry and stereotyping still apply. In case anyone may have forgot (or more likely never read the rules), feel free to vist the "rules" link located at the bottom of this post. Fido, to give you the benefit of the doubt, you would have to clarify this post.

And for those who may not have read the bigotry and stereotyping clause of the forum rules, please read.


It is paradoxical that the very ones who accuse others of racism are, themselves, the stereotypers, and the bigots, as evidenced by their accusations.
VideCorSpoon
 
  1  
Reply Wed 17 Mar, 2010 03:00 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;140679 wrote:
It is paradoxical that the very one who accuses others of racism are, themselves, the stereotypers, and the bigots, as evidenced by their accusations.


Honestly, I don't care what you have to say on the matter. This is an issue of forum policy. To make this very clear, philosophy forum does not condone bigotry, racism, or stereotyping in any way. It is imperative that Fido clarify his statement. No one wants to see him banned for something so trivial. The rules on the forum are in place to make sure everyone has the opportunity to enjoy themselves without having their race, etc. criticized or used against them and make them feel uncomfortable in any way. Rules are rules.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Pretexts, pretexts.
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 08/17/2022 at 05:00:24