It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 5:11 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 418 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
You told me it was a spin job. Where in the Middle East?

Israel is good where it is.


Ok. If it requires taking land from people that are already there then no. If it is uninhabited then yes. It's that simple.
So where in the Middle East qualifies?


Let's cut to the chase. I know your angle and it's not working. Israel has a right to exist. If it requires taking land from people then it doesn't. A Jewish State should not have been created on land that was inhabited by other people. It's that simple. I'm not engaging any further on this subject.

If you want to address what I said about Bin Laden then fine if not have a good one.

Don't call me out for a spin job and then prove what I said was correct. It's that simple.


You spinner it when you conflated Palestine with Middle East. It's so much a part of your style that you don't even know when you're doing it. Don't know what you'd be right about since you really didn't make a point. Have a good one.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 54157
Location: Pearl Harbor, Waukesha, and other things that make no sense
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
long time guy wrote:
A Jewish State should not have been created on land that was inhabited by other people.


(((Antarctica)))

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Curious Hair wrote:
long time guy wrote:
A Jewish State should not have been created on land that was inhabited by other people.


(((Antarctica)))


How would you feel if the Native Americans all of a sudden decided to claim land in this country?

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Last edited by long time guy on Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:19 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 88693
Location: To the left of my post
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
You told me it was a spin job. Where in the Middle East?

Israel is good where it is.


Ok. If it requires taking land from people that are already there then no. If it is uninhabited then yes. It's that simple.
So where in the Middle East qualifies?


Let's cut to the chase. I know your angle and it's not working. Israel has a right to exist. If it requires taking land from people then it doesn't. A Jewish State should not have been created on land that was inhabited by other people. It's that simple. I'm not engaging any further on this subject.

If you want to address what I said about Bin Laden then fine if not have a good one.

Don't call me out for a spin job and then prove what I said was correct. It's that simple.


You spinner it when you conflated Palestine with Middle East. It's so much a part of your style that you don't even know when you're doing it. Don't know what you'd be right about since you really didn't make a point. Have a good one.
You cannot name a place in the Middle East where Israel has a right to exist. That was what I said and you told me I was doing a spin job. Last chance, just say where Israel should be in the Middle East.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
I told you already. If you don't understand tough. How do you feel about Bin Laden's claims. Funny but not surprising you didn't answer.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:21 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
I told you already. If you don't understand tough. How do you feel about Bin Laden's claims. Funny but not surprising you didn't answer.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 88693
Location: To the left of my post
long time guy wrote:
I told you already. If you don't understand tough. How do you feel about Bin Laden's claims. Funny but not surprising you didn't answer.

Who is doing spin now? :lol:

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
I told you already. If you don't understand tough. How do you feel about Bin Laden's claims. Funny but not surprising you didn't answer.

Who is doing spin now? :lol:



If there is no empty land to be inhabited then it doesn't. It's that simple. If you aren't going to address Bin Laden or Israel for that matter then again have a good one.

If you think that Israel has moral justification to do what it did then be prepared for for future turmoil in the region. For those that it effects I hope for the best.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:29 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
I told you already. If you don't understand tough. How do you feel about Bin Laden's claims. Funny but not surprising you didn't answer.

Who is doing spin now? :lol:



If there is no empty land to be inhabited then it doesn't. It's that simple. If you aren't going to address Bin Laden or Israel for that matter then again have a good one.

If you think that Israel has moral justification to do what it did then be prepared for for future turmoil in the region. For those that it affects I hope for the best.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 88693
Location: To the left of my post
long time guy wrote:
If there is no empty land to be inhabited then it doesn't. It's that simple.
:lol: Well there is the answer.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:32 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
If there is no empty land to be inhabited then it doesn't. It's that simple.
:lol: Well there is the answer.


And you continue to duck Bin Laden issue. Not surprising.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2007 10:19 pm
Posts: 6517
pizza_Place: Kaiser's - Kenosha
To lock up and rock, or to have a good one????????????
THAT is the question.
:roll: :lol: :roll:

_________________
Just chillin' like Garret Quillin.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 88693
Location: To the left of my post
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
If there is no empty land to be inhabited then it doesn't. It's that simple.
:lol: Well there is the answer.


And you continue to duck Bin Laden issue. Not surprising.

I just wanted to know if Bin Laden also didnt think Israel had a right to exist in the Middle East. Given how difficult you were with that I don't want to get into the other stuff.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 6:38 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
If there is no empty land to be inhabited then it doesn't. It's that simple.
:lol: Well there is the answer.


And you continue to duck Bin Laden issue. Not surprising.

I just wanted to know if Bin Laden also didnt think Israel had a right to exist in the Middle East. Given how difficult you were with that I don't want to get into the other stuff.

NOT surprising and what you referenced had nothing to do with the issue. Again not surprising

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:30 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19521
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
long time guy wrote:
My basic point is that Bin Laden wasn't interested in destroying American way of life or its religions. He wasn't on a religious crusade either. His opposition to the U.S. was based on U.S. foreign policy. It wasn't based on U.S. customs or some passage from the Koran. He pivoted after the Gulf War towards the U.S. his argument was centered on policy not religion.

He clearly details why he wanted to war with the U.S. if it were about religion then he would not have used US aggression in the region as his baseline. If there is a religious rationale the emphasis that he places on it is clearly secondary.

I could find passages from the Constitution that are clearly derived from the bible does it mean that the Constitution was based on it?


Did you even read the letter you posted? As Jorr pointed out it starts with Allah. Then it includes,

Quote:
What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.


Quote:
(2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

(a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest.


Quote:
(b) It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind:

(i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator. You flee from the embarrassing question posed to you: How is it possible for Allah the Almighty to create His creation, grant them power over all the creatures and land, grant them all the amenities of life, and then deny them that which they are most in need of: knowledge of the laws which govern their lives?


Again this is from your source. This is the best that you could come up with. You are so completely wrong that your own sources contradict your point. It does not even pass a basic level history class level of reasoning.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
long time guy wrote:
My basic point is that Bin Laden wasn't interested in destroying American way of life or its religions. He wasn't on a religious crusade either. His opposition to the U.S. was based on U.S. foreign policy. It wasn't based on U.S. customs or some passage from the Koran. He pivoted after the Gulf War towards the U.S. his argument was centered on policy not religion.

He clearly details why he wanted to war with the U.S. if it were about religion then he would not have used US aggression in the region as his baseline. If there is a religious rationale the emphasis that he places on it is clearly secondary.

I could find passages from the Constitution that are clearly derived from the bible does it mean that the Constitution was based on it?


Did you even read the letter you posted? As Jorr pointed out it starts with Allah. Then it includes,

Quote:
What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.


Quote:
(2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

(a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest.


Quote:
(b) It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind:

(i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator. You flee from the embarrassing question posed to you: How is it possible for Allah the Almighty to create His creation, grant them power over all the creatures and land, grant them all the amenities of life, and then deny them that which they are most in need of: knowledge of the laws which govern their lives?


Again this is from your source. This is the best that you could come up with. You are so completely wrong that your own sources contradict your point. It does not even pass a basic level history class level of reasoning.



If the United States were not involved in Middle Eastern affairs im certain that 911 would not have occurred.

What exactly is your argument by the way? Dissent is easy. What do you think?

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 8:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19521
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
long time guy wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
long time guy wrote:
My basic point is that Bin Laden wasn't interested in destroying American way of life or its religions. He wasn't on a religious crusade either. His opposition to the U.S. was based on U.S. foreign policy. It wasn't based on U.S. customs or some passage from the Koran. He pivoted after the Gulf War towards the U.S. his argument was centered on policy not religion.

He clearly details why he wanted to war with the U.S. if it were about religion then he would not have used US aggression in the region as his baseline. If there is a religious rationale the emphasis that he places on it is clearly secondary.

I could find passages from the Constitution that are clearly derived from the bible does it mean that the Constitution was based on it?


Did you even read the letter you posted? As Jorr pointed out it starts with Allah. Then it includes,

Quote:
What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.


Quote:
(2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

(a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest.


Quote:
(b) It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind:

(i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator. You flee from the embarrassing question posed to you: How is it possible for Allah the Almighty to create His creation, grant them power over all the creatures and land, grant them all the amenities of life, and then deny them that which they are most in need of: knowledge of the laws which govern their lives?


Again this is from your source. This is the best that you could come up with. You are so completely wrong that your own sources contradict your point. It does not even pass a basic level history class level of reasoning.



If the United States were not involved in Middle Eastern affairs im certain that 911 would not have occurred.

What exactly is your argument by the way? Dissent is easy. What do you think?


That Bin Laden's prime motivation was his religion. If he were not a religious fanatic he would not care that the United States had a base in "the Holy Lands". He would have tried to get construction contracts with the US government instead.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 9:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
long time guy wrote:
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
long time guy wrote:
My basic point is that Bin Laden wasn't interested in destroying American way of life or its religions. He wasn't on a religious crusade either. His opposition to the U.S. was based on U.S. foreign policy. It wasn't based on U.S. customs or some passage from the Koran. He pivoted after the Gulf War towards the U.S. his argument was centered on policy not religion.

He clearly details why he wanted to war with the U.S. if it were about religion then he would not have used US aggression in the region as his baseline. If there is a religious rationale the emphasis that he places on it is clearly secondary.

I could find passages from the Constitution that are clearly derived from the bible does it mean that the Constitution was based on it?


Did you even read the letter you posted? As Jorr pointed out it starts with Allah. Then it includes,

Quote:
What are we calling you to, and what do we want from you?

(1) The first thing that we are calling you to is Islam.


Quote:
(2) The second thing we call you to, is to stop your oppression, lies, immorality and debauchery that has spread among you.

(a) We call you to be a people of manners, principles, honour, and purity; to reject the immoral acts of fornication, homosexuality, intoxicants, gambling's, and trading with interest.


Quote:
(b) It is saddening to tell you that you are the worst civilization witnessed by the history of mankind:

(i) You are the nation who, rather than ruling by the Shariah of Allah in its Constitution and Laws, choose to invent your own laws as you will and desire. You separate religion from your policies, contradicting the pure nature which affirms Absolute Authority to the Lord and your Creator. You flee from the embarrassing question posed to you: How is it possible for Allah the Almighty to create His creation, grant them power over all the creatures and land, grant them all the amenities of life, and then deny them that which they are most in need of: knowledge of the laws which govern their lives?


Again this is from your source. This is the best that you could come up with. You are so completely wrong that your own sources contradict your point. It does not even pass a basic level history class level of reasoning.



If the United States were not involved in Middle Eastern affairs im certain that 911 would not have occurred.

What exactly is your argument by the way? Dissent is easy. What do you think?


That Bin Laden's prime motivation was his religion. If he were not a religious fanatic he would not care that the United States had a base in "the Holy Lands". He would have tried to get construction contracts with the US government instead.


It's the very wrong and very American way of thinking about it. That is why we continue to have conflict and ignorant people will continue to pontificate about things they have little knowledge about.

I say this not as justification either. Bin Laden was wrong and there is no excuse for 911. However if we don't examine our policies we will continue to have issues in the Middle East.

If you think that he woke up one morning and decided that he wanted to kill Americans then you are ignorant. Any competent high school could decipher the rationale that he presented.

As far as academic discussions go I have argued the very same points and I'm confident about what I speak. His letter laid out his case. It was exactly the rationale I cited. Very little reference was made regarding religion. His first 5-6 points related to foreign policy. You glossed over it because it didn't fit your narrative and it would force you to face hard truths.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 11, 2008 7:12 am
Posts: 173
Whoa, bro, for a second there I thought this was about Drake Warmbier from UIC. Although, Theta Chi was probably a dead giveaway. Old Warmbeer we called Tallboy Warmbeer, he used to party like fuckin' crazy back in the day. We'd get fuckin' blasted at Barleycorn's or some shit. His old man had a ton of land in like some fuckin' place in Illinois called...some dumb shit name, I don't remember. But anyway, we'd use ATV's and drink all day long and fuck around. He was bangin' this one chick, Tara Kimson, for a few months before somehow he got mono. She was totally cheating on his ass, but she had some real nice funbags.

Shame if he's dead. But life's short, for reals brah.

_________________
Dude, you are my bro.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19521
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
long time guy wrote:
\
It's the very wrong and very American way of thinking about it. That is why we continue to have conflict and ignorant people will continue to pontificate about things they have little knowledge about. (Irony)

I say this not as justification either. Bin Laden was wrong and there is no excuse for 911. However if we don't examine our policies we will continue to have issues in the Middle East.

If you think that he woke up one morning and decided that he wanted to kill Americans then you are ignorant. Any competent high school could decipher the rationale that he presented.

As far as academic discussions go I have argued the very same points and I'm confident about what I speak. His letter laid out his case. It was exactly the rationale I cited. Very little reference was made regarding religion. His first 5-6 points related to foreign policy. You glossed over it because it didn't fit your narrative and it would force you to face hard truths.


His first point in the letter you cited was a passage from the Koran. So was the second. Even the "foreign policy" part is because the United States was in the Holy Land. That was the title of his first Fatwa in fact. It was an affront to Islam. Why else would he be mad at the United States? If he was a Saudi nationalist his government welcomed American forces, but Bin Laden did not because:

Quote:
From his point of view, "for the Muslim Saudi monarchy to invite non-Muslim American troops to fight against Muslim Iraqi soldiers was a serious violation of Islamic law".


Islam was his core belief system, and trying to live out its teachings shaped his entire life and worldview.

You fail to draw any logical conclusions from your own sources. You've determined that American foreign policy is wrong, so you cling to that story no matter what. The bolded part is :lol: . It's so dishonest that this debate is over. You've lost in spectacular fashion. Bye then.

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2016 3:24 pm
Posts: 16901
pizza_Place: Pequods
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
I told you already. If you don't understand tough. How do you feel about Bin Laden's claims. Funny but not surprising you didn't answer.

Who is doing spin now? :lol:



If there is no empty land to be inhabited then it doesn't. It's that simple. If you aren't going to address Bin Laden or Israel for that matter then again have a good one.

If you think that Israel has moral justification to do what it did then be prepared for for future turmoil in the region. For those that it effects I hope for the best.

Israel had the moral justification to be declared a nation as it did so without taking land from any nation as there was at no point in history any independent nation named Palestine. They simply set up a state on land that had been granted to them and the inhabitants (Jew or Arab) would be granted citizenship and really nothing would change other than they would no longer be subjects to the crown. That the Arabs rejected partition is a tragedy and Israel really cannot be blamed for what followed as it was the rejection of partition that led to the present situation.

From the fact you are dodging just about everything I've written in this thread, I can only deduce that you are completely ignorant on this subject and unwilling to engage with facts.

_________________
“When I walked in this morning, and saw the flag was at half mast, I thought 'alright another bureaucrat ate it.'" - Ron Swanson


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 10:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 28, 2009 11:10 am
Posts: 42094
Location: Rock Ridge (splendid!)
pizza_Place: Charlie Fox's / Paisano's
long time guy wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
long time guy wrote:
A Jewish State should not have been created on land that was inhabited by other people.


(((Antarctica)))


How would you feel if the Native Americans all of a sudden decided to claim land in this country?

I'd have some reservations.

_________________
Power is always in the hands of the masses of men. What oppresses the masses is their own ignorance, their own short-sighted selfishness.
- Henry George


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:02 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2006 6:29 pm
Posts: 54157
Location: Pearl Harbor, Waukesha, and other things that make no sense
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Israel had the moral justification to be declared a nation as it did so without taking land from any nation as there was at no point in history any independent nation named Palestine. They simply set up a state on land that had been granted to them and the inhabitants (Jew or Arab) would be granted citizenship and really nothing would change other than they would no longer be subjects to the crown. That the Arabs rejected partition is a tragedy and Israel really cannot be blamed for what followed as it was the rejection of partition that led to the present situation.


I find it interesting that the most strident "anti-Zionists" hate the idea of a "Jewish ethno-state" but in wanting Israel annihilated, would have an Arab ethno-state there instead, which is somehow okay, I guess, because they're not Jews.

_________________
Molly Lambert wrote:
The future holds the possibility to be great or terrible, and since it has not yet occurred it remains simultaneously both.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Wed Jun 21, 2017 11:42 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 9:07 am
Posts: 1132
pizza_Place: aurelios
Don Tiny wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
long time guy wrote:
A Jewish State should not have been created on land that was inhabited by other people.


(((Antarctica)))


How would you feel if the Native Americans all of a sudden decided to claim land in this country?

I'd have some reservations.


:lol: :lol:

_________________
https://www.backroadspubandgrill.com


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
long time guy wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
long time guy wrote:
I told you already. If you don't understand tough. How do you feel about Bin Laden's claims. Funny but not surprising you didn't answer.

Who is doing spin now? :lol:



If there is no empty land to be inhabited then it doesn't. It's that simple. If you aren't going to address Bin Laden or Israel for that matter then again have a good one.

If you think that Israel has moral justification to do what it did then be prepared for for future turmoil in the region. For those that it effects I hope for the best.

Israel had the moral justification to be declared a nation as it did so without taking land from any nation as there was at no point in history any independent nation named Palestine. They simply set up a state on land that had been granted to them and the inhabitants (Jew or Arab) would be granted citizenship and really nothing would change other than they would no longer be subjects to the crown. That the Arabs rejected partition is a tragedy and Israel really cannot be blamed for what followed as it was the rejection of partition that led to the present situation.

From the fact you are dodging just about everything I've written in this thread, I can only deduce that you are completely ignorant on this subject and unwilling to engage with facts.



The reason that I avoided it is because I simply didn't wish to go down this road again. First off yes there wasn't a state called Palestine. However Palestinians were overwhelmingly the majority group in the region. If anyone was to be granted a state it should have been them.

2ndly as you say that Palestine never existed neither has the concept behind Zionism. Zionism is a rather contrived belief created by some guy during the late 1800's. Even if it did have historical relevance that doesn't mean that it had to be actualized on land inhabited by another group.

3rdly The terms under which Israel was created were dubious to say the least.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:15 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
Curious Hair wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Israel had the moral justification to be declared a nation as it did so without taking land from any nation as there was at no point in history any independent nation named Palestine. They simply set up a state on land that had been granted to them and the inhabitants (Jew or Arab) would be granted citizenship and really nothing would change other than they would no longer be subjects to the crown. That the Arabs rejected partition is a tragedy and Israel really cannot be blamed for what followed as it was the rejection of partition that led to the present situation.


I find it interesting that the most strident "anti-Zionists" hate the idea of a "Jewish ethno-state" but in wanting Israel annihilated, would have an Arab ethno-state there instead, which is somehow okay, I guess, because they're not Jews.



No one wants Israel annihilated but if you think it is ok to confiscate land that is possessed by someone else then it is you that requires further examination.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 3:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 6:57 pm
Posts: 88693
Location: To the left of my post
long time guy wrote:
Curious Hair wrote:
Ogie Oglethorpe wrote:
Israel had the moral justification to be declared a nation as it did so without taking land from any nation as there was at no point in history any independent nation named Palestine. They simply set up a state on land that had been granted to them and the inhabitants (Jew or Arab) would be granted citizenship and really nothing would change other than they would no longer be subjects to the crown. That the Arabs rejected partition is a tragedy and Israel really cannot be blamed for what followed as it was the rejection of partition that led to the present situation.


I find it interesting that the most strident "anti-Zionists" hate the idea of a "Jewish ethno-state" but in wanting Israel annihilated, would have an Arab ethno-state there instead, which is somehow okay, I guess, because they're not Jews.



No one wants Israel annihilated but if you think it is ok to confiscate land that is possessed by someone else then it is you that requires further examination.

It's literally the history of the world.

_________________
You do not talk to me like that! I work too hard to deal with this stuff! I work too hard! I'm an important member of the CSFMB! I drive a Dodge Stratus!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 4:22 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jul 27, 2007 9:10 am
Posts: 31948
WaitingforRuffcorn wrote:
long time guy wrote:
\
It's the very wrong and very American way of thinking about it. That is why we continue to have conflict and ignorant people will continue to pontificate about things they have little knowledge about. (Irony)

I say this not as justification either. Bin Laden was wrong and there is no excuse for 911. However if we don't examine our policies we will continue to have issues in the Middle East.

If you think that he woke up one morning and decided that he wanted to kill Americans then you are ignorant. Any competent high school could decipher the rationale that he presented.

As far as academic discussions go I have argued the very same points and I'm confident about what I speak. His letter laid out his case. It was exactly the rationale I cited. Very little reference was made regarding religion. His first 5-6 points related to foreign policy. You glossed over it because it didn't fit your narrative and it would force you to face hard truths.


His first point in the letter you cited was a passage from the Koran. So was the second. Even the "foreign policy" part is because the United States was in the Holy Land. That was the title of his first Fatwa in fact. It was an affront to Islam. Why else would he be mad at the United States? If he was a Saudi nationalist his government welcomed American forces, but Bin Laden did not because:

Quote:
From his point of view, "for the Muslim Saudi monarchy to invite non-Muslim American troops to fight against Muslim Iraqi soldiers was a serious violation of Islamic law".


Islam was his core belief system, and trying to live out its teachings shaped his entire life and worldview.

You fail to draw any logical conclusions from your own sources. You've determined that American foreign policy is wrong, so you cling to that story no matter what. The bolded part is :lol: . It's so dishonest that this debate is over. You've lost in spectacular fashion. Bye then.


This is really comical. For all the talk of "logical conclusions" and "academic discussions" (serving only as a means of demonstrating non existent academic scholarship) you really don't have a clue.

If you were to deduce this from his letter you'd receive an "F" on your assessment in any "academic" setting known to man. At no point does he reference Saudi Arabia or holy land.

He states that his reason for wanting to fight is "simple". He believed that they'd been attacked. By they you can easily infer that he meant
Arabs. His references concentrated on attacks against Arab nations. There were Islamic references but he used historical context as his baseline. It's clear that his opposition to America was based on foreign policy and not religion.

Again there was no reference made about Saudi Arabian holy land yet it "shaped" everything about the guy according to you. If you were to use this argument and form a conclusion from it based on this particular letter you'd be laughed out of every academic arena in this country. There is no way that you could deduce that from this particular letter.

Bin Laden attempted to provide moral justification for his acts by providing political and historical context. Religion by its nature is subjective that's why I try and refrain from placing too much emphasis on it.

Bin Laden's religion didn't teach him to hate Americans. American actions (rightly or wrongly) in his native lands caused him to. Ignoring this while continuing to debate terms and theology does little to provide context to realities which currently exist.

_________________
The Hawk wrote:
This is going to reach a head pretty soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:06 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 05, 2015 2:39 pm
Posts: 19521
pizza_Place: Lou Malnati's
You've lost, and now you are embarrassing yourself. It reads like a child trying to use a thesaurus to sound intelligent. How did you come to have this non-American worldview btw? Where else have you lived?

_________________
Why are only 14 percent of black CPS 11th-graders proficient in English?

The Missing Link wrote:
For instance they were never taught that Columbus was a slave owner.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Otto Warmbier
PostPosted: Thu Jun 22, 2017 8:55 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 8:22 am
Posts: 15018
pizza_Place: Wha Happen?
long time guy wrote:

Bin Laden attempted to provide moral justification for his acts by providing political and historical context. Religion by its nature is subjective that's why I try and refrain from placing too much emphasis on it.


that appears to be part of your problem, though.

_________________
Ба́бушка гада́ла, да на́двое сказа́ла—то ли до́ждик, то ли снег, то ли бу́дет, то ли нет.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 418 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group