1
   

Yasser Arafat Is Dead

 
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 03:40 pm
I am sure that in many liberal circles joining the military equals strapping a bomb on and blowing oneself up on a school bus, but I don't.

That is a poor comparison freeduck.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 03:47 pm
McGentrix wrote:
I am sure that in many liberal circles joining the military equals strapping a bomb on and blowing oneself up on a school bus, but I don't.

That is a poor comparison freeduck.


And that is a poor conclusion. It's true that we don't use kamikaze tactics, but war is war. I am suggesting that Palestinian parents are no better able to prevent their children from 'joining the resistance' than American parents are able to prevent their children from joining the military.

I would put a question to you, McG. If you were a young Palestinian man, what would your future look like? Exactly. And young men with few choices often choose the military or, in this case, militancy.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 04:20 pm
Some Palestinian views on Arafat:

Washington Post article
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 04:25 pm
gav wrote:
dlowan wrote:
Hmmmm...

"If an architect could be ascribed to the ensuing mayhem, it would be poet and schoolteacher Padraig Pearse, who won his co-conspirators over to an ideology of "blood sacrifice"---the notion that if a small cache of committed men died public martyrs' deaths, then the island's entire population would join in the struggle for independence."


"After all, why does a supposedly democratic party need to hang on to guns and bombs if it truly is a democratic party? Like lots of simple questions in Ireland the real answer is complex and mired in myth, murder and political strategy.

The first part of the answer lies in history and the actions of the man the present Irish Republic, and the Provisionals, revere as the founding father of the State. When Padraig Pearse, and his doomed rag-tag rebel army, took over the General Post Office on O?Connell Street in Dublin at Easter in 1916 and walked outside to proclaim an Irish republic, he wasn?t trumpeting the greatness of parliamentary politics.

The Easter Proclamation was, and is, a chilling semifascistic rant that is heavy on the power of arms, blood sacrifice and dead children to bring a united Ireland into being. Killing ?alien? British soldiers was, Pearse declared, the ?fundamental right? of all true Irish republicans. Guns and bombs were the way forward.

In the end, Pearse got what he wanted, a honourable execution by baffled British Army generals, but his poisonous legacy lived on, inspiring generation after generation of young Irishmen to take up the gun.

The proclamation is still read out, usually by a child, at every republican Easter commemoration, traditionally held at the graveside of dead IRA volunteers. Peace process or no peace process, there will be the same bitter words at Easter 2003 as there were in 1916."


Not too impressed yet, Gav. Got anything to add?

And - 'tis not just a small group of committed men dying in palestine.


And that doesn't come across as simple case of, well, character asassination? It doesn't sound even wee bit biased to you? Rolling Eyes

Here's that "bitter" proclamation thats read at the Commemorations - like I mean it reeks of equality and civil liberties for all and other such nasty things!!! Rolling Eyes

POBLACHT NA H EIREANN
___________________________
THE PROVISIONAL GOVERNMENT
OF THE
IRISH REPUBLIC
TO THE PEOPLE OF IRELAND

IRISHMEN AND IRISHWOMEN: In the name of God and of the dead generations from which she receives her old tradition of nationhood, Ireland, through us, summons her children to her flag and strikes for her freedom.

Having organised and trained her manhood through her secret revolutionary organisation, the Irish Republican Brotherhood, and through her open military organisations, the Irish Volunteers and the Irish Citizen Army, having patiently perfected her discipline, having resolutely waited for the right moment to reveal itself, she now seizes that moment, and, supported by her exiled children in America and by gallant allies in Europe, but relying in the first on her own strength, she strikes in full confidence of victory.

We declare the right of the people of Ireland to the ownership of Ireland, and to the unfettered control of Irish destinies, to be sovereign and indefeasible. The long usurpation of that right by a foreign people and government has not extinguished the right, nor can it ever be extinguished except by the destruction of the Irish people. In every generation the Irish people have asserted their right to national freedom and sovereignty; six times during the last three hundred years they have asserted it to arms. Standing on that fundamental right and again asserting it in arms in the face of the world, we hereby proclaim the Irish Republic as a Sovereign Independent State, and we pledge our lives and the lives of our comrades-in-arms to the cause of its freedom, of its welfare, and of its exaltation among the nations.

The Irish Republic is entitled to, and hereby claims, the allegiance of every Irishman and Irishwoman. The Republic guarantees religious and civil liberty, equal rights and equal opportunities to all its citizens, and declares its resolve to pursue the happiness and prosperity of the whole nation and all of its parts, cherishing all of the children of the nation equally and oblivious of the differences carefully fostered by an alien government, which have divided a minority from the majority in the past.

Until our arms have brought the opportune moment for the establishment of a permanent National, representative of the whole people of Ireland and elected by the suffrages of all her men and women, the Provisional Government, hereby constituted, will administer the civil and military affairs of the Republic in trust for the people.

We place the cause of the Irish Republic under the protection of the Most High God. Whose blessing we invoke upon our arms, and we pray that no one who serves that cause will dishonour it by cowardice, in humanity, or rapine. In this supreme hour the Irish nation must, by its valour and discipline and by the readiness of its children to sacrifice themselves for the common good, prove itself worthy of the august destiny to which it is called.

Signed on Behalf of the Provisional Government.

Thomas J. Clarke,
Sean Mac Diarmada, Thomas MacDonagh,
P. H. Pearse, Eamonn Ceannt,
James Connolly, Joseph Plunkett


Yes Gav - that is what comes of rather arrogantly jusrt telling someone to go and look up something - these were from the first few Google hits - if you have a particular view, I suggest it behoves you to give some sources for your view - no?

I had already read the proclamation, and found in it little of what the critic I quoted said - but, when people begin to speak of "blood" this and that, it generally sets my fur on end - for little good usually follows - and, you have not answered my objection to the account of "blood sacrifice" given earlier in my quotes. It APPEARS to mean the sacrifice of a dedicated few - but, where in Ireland or Palestine has that been so? Terror means the sacrifce of the indiscriminate many - usually, as in Palestine, on both sides...
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 04:28 pm
McGentrix wrote:
FreeDuck wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
If the Palestinians loved their children, they would stop sending them into Israel with bombs attached to them.


I believe the suicide bombers are an 'all volunteer' force.


I would never allow my son to martyr himself for any cause.

I would knock him on his butt and chain him in the basement until he regained his senses first.


This would include if he joined the US army - about to go to Iraq?
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 04:44 pm
gav wrote:
dLowan go research Padraig Pearse's idea of "blood sacrifice". This is as far as Arafat went, he didn't IMO sacrifice innocents.
Shocked You can not be serious! Israel's guilt or lack thereof notwithstanding, Arafat was a ruthless terrorist and a killer of innocents.

Quote:
At 4:30AM on September 5, 1972, five Arab terrorists wearing track suits climbed the six and 1/2 foot fence surrounding the Olympic Village in Munich, Germany. Once inside, they were met by three others who had gained entrance with credentials. Within 24 hours, 11 Israelis, five terrorists, and a German policeman were dead.

Just before 5:00AM, the terrorists knocked on the door of Israeli wrestling coach Moshe Weinberg who opened the door, realized immediately something was wrong and shouted a warning. Weinberg and weightlifter Joseph Romano attempted to block the door while their members escaped, but they were killed by the terrorists. The Arabs then rounded up nine Israelis to hold as hostages.

At 9:30AM, the terrorists announced that they were Palestinian Arabs, and demanded that Israel release 234 Arab prisoners in Israeli jails and Germany release two German terrorist leaders imprisoned in Frankfurt.

27 years later, still a bastard:

Quote:
In January 24, 2000, the official newspaper of Yasir Arafat's Palestinian Authority (Al-Hayat Al-Jadida) urged Arab regimes to boycott the summer Olympic Games in Australia, because a moment of silence was planned at the start of the games in memory of the eleven Israeli athletes murdered by Arafat's PLO terrorists at the 1972 Munich Olympics.


Whatever else he may have been or to whom, the man was a murderous terrorist. Good riddance.
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 04:46 pm
dlowan wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
FreeDuck wrote:
McGentrix wrote:
If the Palestinians loved their children, they would stop sending them into Israel with bombs attached to them.


I believe the suicide bombers are an 'all volunteer' force.


I would never allow my son to martyr himself for any cause.

I would knock him on his butt and chain him in the basement until he regained his senses first.


This would include if he joined the US army - about to go to Iraq?


Dlowan, usually you show yourself to be an intelligent poster, why the sudden change?
0 Replies
 
gav
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 04:49 pm
Quote:
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 05:07 pm
This is getting hilarious.

I am getting flak from right AND left.

I must be on the right ttrack.

McG.

Dead is dead.

Yes, if your kid goes off to Iraq, presumably s/he hopes to stay alive. The intent is not to die - however, s/he may well do so - and doing so in the act of killing innocent non-combatants is pretty much as likely as doing so while killing enemy combatants - (there seems good reason to think that many thousands more Iraqi non-combatants have died, than combatants) - especially if s/he is a bomber pilot, or in charge of a gun sending shells into a city - just as the suicide bomber may die doing so.

The INTENT is different - (and this is not unimportant) but the result may well be the same. If your child died in Iraq - would you not think of him/her as a martyr to some great American ideal of liberty or something, just as the Palestinian parent thinks of their child's sacrifice? Of course, you think the Palestinian parent wrong, just as they think you to be.

I see many similarities. Don't you?
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 05:11 pm
gav wrote:
Quote:


Yep, Gav - all well and good - while it is they who die (though those poor bloody conscripts who died fighting them - just as much victims of the British government as they were - might not agree) - but you brought this thing up in relation to Palestine - I defy you to say that only dedicated folk, who chose to die, died - the majority of victims have been non-combatants on both sides - no?

I would argue similarly for the IRA's bloody history, too - without failing to be aware of the atrocities and horrors perpetrated by the other side - which you will no doubt immediately accuse me of being.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 05:14 pm
OCCOM BILL wrote:
gav wrote:
dLowan go research Padraig Pearse's idea of "blood sacrifice". This is as far as Arafat went, he didn't IMO sacrifice innocents.
Shocked You can not be serious! Israel's guilt or lack thereof notwithstanding, Arafat was a ruthless terrorist and a killer of innocents.

Quote:
At 4:30AM on September 5, 1972, five Arab terrorists wearing track suits climbed the six and 1/2 foot fence surrounding the Olympic Village in Munich, Germany. Once inside, they were met by three others who had gained entrance with credentials. Within 24 hours, 11 Israelis, five terrorists, and a German policeman were dead.

Just before 5:00AM, the terrorists knocked on the door of Israeli wrestling coach Moshe Weinberg who opened the door, realized immediately something was wrong and shouted a warning. Weinberg and weightlifter Joseph Romano attempted to block the door while their members escaped, but they were killed by the terrorists. The Arabs then rounded up nine Israelis to hold as hostages.

At 9:30AM, the terrorists announced that they were Palestinian Arabs, and demanded that Israel release 234 Arab prisoners in Israeli jails and Germany release two German terrorist leaders imprisoned in Frankfurt.

27 years later, still a bastard:

Quote:
In January 24, 2000, the official newspaper of Yasir Arafat's Palestinian Authority (Al-Hayat Al-Jadida) urged Arab regimes to boycott the summer Olympic Games in Australia, because a moment of silence was planned at the start of the games in memory of the eleven Israeli athletes murdered by Arafat's PLO terrorists at the 1972 Munich Olympics.


Whatever else he may have been or to whom, the man was a murderous terrorist. Good riddance.


Yes - indeed- but, caught up with Israel's own history of terrorism, have we?

This stuff just ISN'T black and white! Much as you try and make it so Bill -
I know ambivalence and nuance makes you ill...


...and, much as I'd like to lock the leaders of both sides up with no food, water, or toilets, until they hammer out a just agreement - which then has to be approved as just by a committee of exemplary and trusted folk from other nations - ALSO then locked up sans food, water, or loos!
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 05:20 pm
dlowan wrote:
The INTENT is different - (and this is not unimportant) but the result may well be the same. If your child died in Iraq - would you not think of him/her as a martyr to some great American ideal of liberty or something, just as the Palestinian parent thinks of their child's sacrifice? Of course, you think the Palestinian parent wrong, just as they think you to be.

I see many similarities. Don't you?
I don't see any similarity at all. If I strapped a bomb to my chest and blew up a coffee shop full of unsuspecting patrons, regardless of my motivation, my parents would, or would have, been ashamed to admit I was their son. INTENT has everything to do with it.

dlowan wrote:
Yes - indeed- but, caught up with Israel's own history of terrorism, have we?
Yup, but this thread is about Arafat. Hence the "Israel's guilt or lack thereof notwithstanding" in the original post. :wink:
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 05:56 pm
" Yup, but this thread is about Arafat. Hence the "Israel's guilt or lack thereof notwithstanding" in the original post. Wink"

Hmmm - good try.

I have been toing and froing with the intent thing, you know.

Have you caught up with JanW - a "just war" specialist?

Do.

My evolving sense is that when, despite intent, the toll on innocents reaches a certain point, then intent ceases to become relevant. That is, that we KNOW our actions are slaughter - and we are totally culpable whatever we may pretend to be doing when we drop that bomb, or whatever.

100,000 + civilian deaths in Iraq? Hmmmmmmmm.....

Let us say that the figure is correct - has that point been reached?

At what point would you say that it has...

Maybe never, for you?
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 08:56 pm
It's really pretty simple, Moishe. Terrorism is a means towards an end whether employed by Palestinians, Irish or Jews.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 09:41 pm
InfraBlue wrote:
It's really pretty simple, Moishe. Terrorism is a means towards an end whether employed by Palestinians, Irish or Jews.


Have the ends ever been met for any terrorist group? I know the IRA was successful but are they the only example of a winning group?
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 09:48 pm
The Irgun and Lohemi were successful in ousting the British from Palestine. They were instrumental as part of the IDF in ethnically cleansing certain Jewish dominated areas of Palestine during the war of independence.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 09:52 pm
InfraBlue wrote:
The Irgun and Lohemi were successful in ousting the British from Palestine. They were instrumental as part of the IDF in ethnically cleansing the Jewish areas of Palestine during the war of independence.


Cleansing during the 1948 war? Please provide proof of this. It wasn't the Israelis that started that war; it was other Arab countries that started the 1948 war. Israel was busy fighting for its life against a group of countries that were bent on killing every Jew there.

I don't know how successful they were seeing as how this all happened after WWII and the UK was weakened.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2004 10:34 pm
Read Benny Morris' books, namely, Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881-2001, Operation Hiram Revisisted: a Correction, and especially, The Birth of the Palestinian Refugee Problem Revisited. In these he details the ethnic cleansing carried out by the IDF.

The war was a progression of the hostilities between the Jews and Arabs in Palestine. It came to a head with the Jews' declaration of independence, and the Arab states going in to assist the the Arabs there.

Israel was defending its ethnocentric raison d'etre. The Arabs refused partition of Palestine. They weren't "bent on killing every Jew there."

So, the Zionist terrorist groups took advantage of Britain's weakened state and found success therein.
0 Replies
 
OCCOM BILL
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2004 12:35 pm
dlowan wrote:
" Yup, but this thread is about Arafat. Hence the "Israel's guilt or lack thereof notwithstanding" in the original post. Wink"

Hmmm - good try.

I have been toing and froing with the intent thing, you know.

Have you caught up with JanW - a "just war" specialist?

Do.

My evolving sense is that when, despite intent, the toll on innocents reaches a certain point, then intent ceases to become relevant. That is, that we KNOW our actions are slaughter - and we are totally culpable whatever we may pretend to be doing when we drop that bomb, or whatever.

100,000 + civilian deaths in Iraq? Hmmmmmmmm.....

Let us say that the figure is correct - has that point been reached?
Nope.

dlowan wrote:
At what point would you say that it has...

Maybe never, for you?
That's not as easy to pin down as you'd imagine. In hypotheticals:What if China, at some point in the future was threatening to wipe out Australia? What is our only credible threat to keep that populous giant at bay? What if they then Nuked Melbourne or Brisbane and were now threatening Sydney? Would we have any choice but to vaporize tens of millions of innocents in Chongqing, Shanghai or Beijing? (Chongqing, by itself, is home to almost as many people as Australia.)

It's easy to condemn the thought of ever killing innocents with or without intent (You're gonna love this Laughing), but that's too "black and white" of a view point. Sometimes decisions aren't that simple. There are no just answers for some questions. Sometimes; innocents will die regardless. In these situations you must consider not only how many; but why.

20% of Iraqi citizens are little girls, 14 years old or younger. That's 5 million good reasons to fight for democracy.
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2004 03:10 pm
If only that were the reason we are fighting.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 07/21/2024 at 05:40:47