Marines and Honour
- Thread starter Spade
- Start date
Well for my reply I will quote Shakespeare
A rose by any other name would smell as sweet
Knowing you need help I will also provide the interpretation:
Meant to say that the names of things do not matter, only what things are.
To you I am a troll to others I am not. To you I ask hard question, but you cannot answer and run for the door.
Another new member tore your so called thinking apart word by word, phrase by phrase. Or as I prefer to say - Ripped you a new one.
Would you care to explain what a Non Violent Pacifist is? Till then I will only keep on asking the same question. Perhaps others may do the same.
I think there would. There would be no Israeli's left.
Gh. Certainly not EAO.
How'd this get from being about marines and honor to another of the few hundred threads on Pallies and Izzies?
Agreed that GH is a Pacifist. But EO has to add a phrase that turns it into what he and his ilk use much to often, pure BS. A non violent pacifist. Is there such a person as a violent pacifist?? Only in EAO's world.
Well, he should put his schtick back in his schpants, schzip up, and schtick to the schtopic.
EAO is hateful -MF is not - MF does make points, rebuts, you get an answer. EAO - well scared of the dark
How about taking me into WB - List your grievances and we can take it from there.
Earth_as_one, is that all you want, condemnation or defence? You sound like the UN. A condemnation here, a resolution of disapproval there, everyone feels good about themselves, a job well done and... no real solution or change anywhere.
Or do you think something should be done about these war crimes? If so, where do you start? Are you willing to go through each point into more detail, who is doing it, what's behind it and what can be done to stop it?
Hence the demand for condemnation rather than solutions. Once again, it would be a case of no concern or desire to end real crimes but rather to demonize, no matter what the truth is. In fact, any attempt to examine the alllegations would be rejected as that would defeat the purpose.
Exactley, the fact that the majority of his list can also be applied to the Palestinians get's glossed over.
and eao.... I'm also looking for an explanation of your "non violent pacifist" label.
Condemnation of the criminal nuclear rogue state of Israel is the right thing to do. Those marines are probably heros there.
I disgree that I gloss over Palestinian war crimes. I have listed them repeatedly on this forum:
I recognize both sides war crimes. Meanwhile not a single Israeli apologist can condemn these war crimes:
Who is glossing over war crimes again???? Israeli apologists can't admit a single Israeli war crime or crime against humanity, while I can list both sides war crimes. Perhaps you'd like to explain why you believe Israeli apologists aren't glossing over Israeli war crimes and that I am?.
Seriously? Why? Do the terms seem contradictory to you?
Nonviolence has two (closely related) meanings. (1) It can refer, first, to a general philosophy of abstention from violence because of moral or religious principle (e.g. "She believes in nonviolence.") (2) It can refer to the behaviour of people using nonviolent action (e.g. "The demonstrators maintained their nonviolence.")
Pacifism is the opposition to war and violence. The term "pacifism" was coined by the French peace campaigner Émile Arnaud (1864 - 1921) and adopted by other peace activists at the tenth Universal Peace Congress in Glasgow in 1901.
I oppose war and violence. I believe in non-violent means to resist oppression and injustice. I support nonviolent efforts to gain freedom and justice. For example:
bilin-village.org | Discover Bil'in
BTW, I've posted the above several times.
LG, its highly doubtful that Palestinians have sent bulldozers and heavy equipment into Israel to destroy war and sewage treatment facilities and distribution systems. But if you think otherwise then please back up your opinion with references. Can you provide any evidence supporting your belief that Palestinians have used Israeli children to search for explosives? Do you really believe that Palestinians interfere with international food and medical humanitarian aid destined for Israel? How are they doing that? or are you too just glossing over Israeli war crimes?
If Palestinians committed the same war crimes as Israelis I'd have no problems condemning those war crimes too, just as I have condemned war crimes that Palestinians have actually committed.
I condemn all war crimes and anyone who commits them, therefore, I stand on moral highground.
In fact, I condemn all alleged war crimes, whether they can be backed up by fact or they are merely twisted propaganda, therefore I stand on the highest moral highground, and any argument that I make is more humane and superior in every way to that of those who don't stand on the same ground as me.
Based largely on propaganda and false allegations, I cleverly take accounting of war crimes committed by both sides, in order to present myself as objective and as concerned and totally against war crimes, and then place my support on the side which I have falsely portrayed as the one with the least war crimes. Some would think that in doing this, I actually don't give a hoot about war crimes, have no interest in ensuring the facts and in finding ways to stop any real crimes from being committed, but instead see them as tactics in my passionate cause to make the side I'm against look more evil than the side I support.
Er... well, that is how you come across in any case, Earth.
Sorry, war crimes are serious issues that have to be addressed and stopped because they have a huge toll on human life. Serious, in-depth examination of the alleged crimes, of the facts, is necessary, not to win an argument, but to work on prevention and accountability. Treating them as playdough to win arguments is literally saying you don't give a hoot about real war crimes or the people whose lives are lost or devastated by them.