I just typed up a long reply to Aristophanes’s anti-Israeli dogma, and when I clicked the link he provided and went back the entire goddamn post was gone. The entire thing. I’ve never seen a forum do that before. What the hell?
You don’t need to expect me to type up another one. The whole thing just seems to be about comparing casualities to each other, anyway, and he’s already proven that he doesn’t know much on the subject.
hahaha
Yea, anyone who isn’t for Israel doesn’t know anything about it…
Someone here is anti-state?!?!
You don’t seem to understand that Israel has strategic concerns in the regions surrounding it and simply comparing casualities tells you nothing about what the goals are (seriously, are anarchists completely against preemptive war?). You keep talking about apartheid laws, but I couldn’t find any in the link you gave. I also don’t understand what you mean by racially pure. Israeli Jews come from Europe, Spain, Morocco, Yemen, Iraq, Ethiopia, and dozens of other regions. They’re about as multi-cultural as can be. Since I oppose the existence of the state I define a nation by its people, if Arabs become a majority Israel is essentially wiped off the map.
first, “ahahahahhahahahahahhahahhaahhaa”
to all of that
especially this part…
i mean “ahahhahahaaa”
second, just post this in the ahmadinijad thread so people can see what I said instead of taking your word for it.
Yeah, this forum does that occasionally. It’s a good habit to copy your post before you send it, especially if its really long, that way if it does disappear into the abyss, you can just paste and try again. I’ve had it happen a few times to me, as I’m sure others had encountered the same frustration.
Aside from that, I don’t know if all anarchists are, but I’d say any libertarians worth their salt are completely against preemptive war. It’s a violation of the NAP. I the words of Dwight D. Eisenhower, “Preventive war was an invention of Hitler. Frankly, I would not even listen to anyone seriously that came and talked about such a thing.”
__
If they don’t support preemptive wars, then I will not consider myself a traditional anarchist (because they are justified). As I said, I typed up a long reply to your post and it got deleted, so I’m not really interested anymore. The whole discussion is just the usual anti-Israel rant and it isn’t worth it.
Eh, who cares about the NAP? I support anarcho-capitalism out of pragmatism rather than ideology. If socialism worked I would support it, but it doesn’t.
But how is the preemptive war funded? No different than anything else only the state can do: coercion. So, yeah, I suppose if you not only support wars between states but also coercion to fund such endeavors, you might not be an anarchist or a libertarian.
Always remember to [Ctrl + C] & [Ctrl + V]!
No, it is a fact fest over there that you are unwilling to admit into your worldview because you…support…apartheid…
You would rather they (the worthless nameless arabs) be bombed out of existence before they have started a conflict than admit that Israel is an aggressive colonial state.
Why don’t you call Bibi up and tell him to kill all of those other truly threatening countries around Israel…
Israel holds the world hostage with their Samson plan (They will attack anyone who doesn’t support them if they are attacked; “kicking in the pillars of the temple of EARTH.”)
Yea, if pre emptive wars are justified, then the US should be all over Israel. But, Israel spends more money spying on the US than they do on any other country.
If you take this logic further it will result in any country attacking any other country if they percieve cultural differences. You’ve got a lot to learn little Zionist.
Is it not pragmatic to, in order to foster markets and the benefits of anarcho-capitalism, disregard the state as illegitimate? To view ALL aggression as counter-productive? I find it difficult to see how anarcho-capitalism can flourish if the state, its coercion, and its aggression are viewed in ANY way as pragmatic, much less legitimate. Maybe you can describe how liberty and coercion are not mutually exclusive.
Without those wars Israel as a concept or a people would be gone. I do disapprove of the methods, though. Something like half of all kids there go to state-funded dormitories. The entire mentality is authoritarian. Do you know how people there reacted after I left school? It’s not free at all. But it isn’t racist and it doesn’t commit genocide.
Ignoring Aristophanes’ post for obvious reasons.
Yea, you are a Jewish supremacist.
You’ve gotta ignore the illegal wepons (banned by international treaty) that Israel uses on civilians in Gaza.
White phosphorus is used to blind night vision tanks, not civilian crowd control…
The idea of Israel is a state. The people are not, and should not be identified by the existence of a state in their territory. Further, the notion of murdering innocent people to protect the state is wholly illegitimate. Wars are not to protect people; they are to protect the establishment, the status quo, the state.
Also, although I have been following the discussion between you and Aristophanes, it is not obvious why you would ignore his statements, unless it was because you have not legitimate or logical rebuttal. So, would you at least elaborate on why you ignore him, as it really is not obvious.
Thank you, phi.
@Luminar “Why will no man confess his faults? Because he is still in their grasp; only he who is awake can recount his dream, and similarly a confession of sin is a proof of sound mind.” - Seneca (Epistle LIII)
don’t see how israel is an arpetheid state
Read what Chomsky says…“we call it something else” even tough it’s ends are the same. Your video that attempts to compare the apartheid of South Africa to the “situation” in Israel is kind of a red herring.
RE: Your video from Prage University (which is not a University) - It is a Conservative Think Tank
When he says that Israel doesn’t govern those in the occupied states he is lying. Israel enforces what is called “martial law” in the territories and masques their “martial law” with the emotional appeal of terrorism. There might not be terrorism if Israel didn’t have “occupying forces” bulldozing Palestinian homes.
He uses appeal to emotion (you can hear the inflection in his voice change) when referring to the arabs bombing the Israelis without once mentioning the “retaliation” that Israel dishyes out being magnitudes above the car bombings.
He uses more fallacies at 4:50 to equate anyone who says Israel is bad thinks Israel “doesn’t deserve to exist.” This is wholly untrue. There is a thing called the “two-state solution” that allows Israel to exist, but he doesn’t need to mention that does he…
Chomsky starts with South Africa at about 3:00.
“There might not be terrorism if Israel didn’t have “occupying forces” bulldozing Palestinian homes”
And there might not be bulldozing of homes if there wasn’t terrorism. See where this argument gets us?
"He uses appeal to emotion (you can hear the inflection in his voice change) when referring to the arabs bombing the Israelis "
How dare his voice change and he “appeal to emotion” when discussing people getting blown up. Of course, you are guilty of the same thing with the pictures you just posted.
“without once mentioning the “retaliation” that Israel dishyes out being magnitudes above the car bombings.”
I get it now…all acts of violence must at all times be equal. I tell you what, if you walk up and punch me in the face you can expect much more in return.
“You’ve gotta ignore the illegal wepons (banned by international treaty)”
This statement seems odd coming from someone who I"m guessing views the state as illegitimate. I don’t believe there is such thing as an “illegal” weapon.
Sorry but indeed, it is possible to become worse than the aggressor if you use excessive force.
That’s one of the fundamental principles of Libertarianism. The vibes in this thread are troubling, ease up people.
“Sorry but it is possible to become worse than the aggressor, if you use excessive force.”
And who is going to judge what excessive force is? If you kill 20 of my people in a car bomb, am I allowed to retaliate and kill 20 of your people? Or is 25 acceptable? Maybe we could let the U.N. decide.
