Posted on 11/16/2004 4:52:07 AM PST by Gritty
You may have noticed by now what I'm trying to do is get mike to recognize his "opinion" is nothing but a collection of platitudes and cliches. Not with much success, I might add.
I've been hoping to demonstrate to him, by asking questions designed to require verifiable infomation as answers, that what he "knows" is actually nothing but a series of policy statements, and those from sources trying to spin this as a bilateral problem.
Unfortunately, our culture is so corrupted with the doctrine of "compromise" that I've literally witnessed victimized spouses desperately trying to construct rationalizations of how they "drove them to it." The idea of a unilateral aggressor is a totally alien concept.
Frankly, I've about given up. He's freely admitted he knows less about the subject than many of the posters on this thread, all of whom disagree with him, yet maintains his opinions have merit. This is "invincible ignorance" by its classical definition.
Mike, I'm hoping you're a relatively young person, because most of what I've heard from you is a somewhat more sophisticated version of the teenagers' plaintive "you just don't understand what I'm saying." For me, it would be a real "jackalope sighting" if you're a conservative holding such doctrinaire views unmodified by life experience.
Perhaps you are right, and I should stop trying to argue on this forum (you know what they say about arguing on the internet). I clearly don't have the ammo to change anyone's minds here.
But I also don't buy the argument that my lack of knowledge invalidates my position: There are a lot of people who ARE relative experts in the field who would agree with me (for instance, I would argue, the president of the united states), and I haven't seen any convincing arguments that refute my central points... which were, I believe, that we shouldn't just kill Muslims indiscriminately, and that it is possible to work with some segments of the muslim population. (not exactly an extreme statement, I would say) I also am good friends with a couple of PhD students who work on ME diplomatic history, so while I don't have the expertise myself, I do know that many who do wouldn't agree with you.
As far as the Palestinians having legitimate grievances, I won't go into detail, since, like I said, I don't have the ammo. But it does seem to me that as the previous occupiers of Isreal, who were driven off their land through military action, to claim that they have no legitimate grievances and are only acting out because they are insane animals is dishonest.
No, it's not. And while you're right, they left their homes because of military action, just whose military action caused them to leave?
Hint: It wasn't the Israelis!
Hey, I'm not trying to assign blame! I'm just saying that even if we disagree with the demands of the Palestinians, we can understand them somewhat. The 48 war resulted in 100s of thousands of refugees, who left jewish territory. While the Arab states certainly weren't the "victims" in the war, the refugees were expelled from Jewish held territory.
Refusal to accept that there were nasty things done by both sides is simply denial.
"And The Lord said to me: "The prophets are prophesying lies in My Name; I did not send them, nor did I command them or speak to them. They are prophesying to you a lying vision, worthless divination, and the deceit of their own minds." (Jeremiah 14:14 RSV)
Islam is a cult started by a "false prophet" and Satan is Allah---
I'm not denying both sides did nasty things for a moment, but your claim that the arab residents were "expelled" from "jewish" territory needs some substantiation.
Many arabs left (temporarily, so they thought) on the advice of the attacking states (Nasser himself I believe). My understanding is others were told to leave; which they did, not lifting a finger to defend their territorial integrity from the invading armies of five different sovereign states. (i.e. they picked to side with the invaders, and the invaders lost)
Now if you can find an arab resident that had his properties forcefully expropriated, while at the same time worked in any capacity to maintain the aforementioned territorial integrity, I'll concede that person has a grievance. But all those arabs holding Israeli citizenship had to come from somewhere.
As for the rest of them, you may as well claim all those distraught democrats out there have a "legitimate grievance" too.
Note to the Netherlands...kill all your Muslims now!
Uncle Ali wants to tell you a bedtime story:
"I surely know that you, O America, will be destroyed "
"I surely know that you O Europe, will be destroyed"
"I surely know that you O Holland will be destroyed"
"I surely know that you, O Hirshi Ali will be destroyed"
"I surely know that you, O unbelieving fundamentalists, will be destroyed "
Hasboena Allah wa ni3ma alwakeel.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.