Nobel Prize vs. Suicide Vest

[outsidethebox]

I never picked up a book and read any meaningful amount of it without buying it. And I never browsed without spending at least $100.

 

I spend more on books in a month than most of you illiterates spend annually on beer.

 

 

 

Strictly in the interests of playing devil's advocate...

 

"Except Palestine"

I doubt you spend more on books than beerball spends on beer in a month.

 

Was Palestine an actual state before Israel settled there?

[DC Tom]

Was Palestine an actual state before Israel settled there?

 

Depends on who you ask.

 

But again, playing devil's advocate...the UN Partition Plan in '48 established Jewish and Arab states. Subsequently, using military action, the Jewish state annexed the Arab-designated lands and declared the state of Israel.

[outsidethebox]

Depends on who you ask.

 

But again, playing devil's advocate...the UN Partition Plan in '48 established Jewish and Arab states. Subsequently, using military action, the Jewish state annexed the Arab-designated lands and declared the state of Israel.

Thanks Tom. That battle has been going on longer than we have been alive. will probably still be going on long after we are gone.

[LeviF]

Why would they want to go on the offensive? Israel's wars have been for self preservation, not conquest or desire to annihilate some other country.

And who is to say that that wouldn't change if the tables were suddenly turned? As Tom has already said, they were belligerent enough to take an Arab state.

 

Besides, I didn't say it was probable, I said I wouldn't be surprised.

[DC Tom]

And who is to say that that wouldn't change if the tables were suddenly turned? As Tom has already said, they were belligerent enough to take an Arab state.

 

Of course...that was in response to a shitload of Arab states attacking them first...maybe...really, defining the "aggressor" in the collapse of the partition plan in '48 is completely futile. The general practice was to wait for the Brits to un-ass a town or area, then start fighting over it. Both sides were trying to grab as much land as they could before someone stopped them.

 

But recent history is Israel taking land less for imperialistic reasons than security reasons - they gave up the Suez once the security on that border was secured, the Golan's a valuable buffer zone (considering by tank it's about a three hour drive from the Golan to the Med), they've always withdrawn from southern Lebanon after they've invaded. The West Bank is the only region that can be considered "conquered" in the traditional sense.

[whateverdude]

Depends on who you ask.

 

But again, playing devil's advocate...the UN Partition Plan in '48 established Jewish and Arab states. Subsequently, using military action, the Jewish state annexed the Arab-designated lands and declared the state of Israel.

Wrong, I'll say it again, it was only after the Jews re-inhabited their historic homeland of Judea and Samaria, that the myth of a Palestinian nation was created and marketed worldwide. Jews come from Judea, not Palestinians. There is no language known as Palestinian, or any Palestinian culture distinct from that of all the Arabs in the area. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs indistinguishable from Arabs throughout the Middle East. The Palestinian National Charter adopted by the PLO states this fact in the first article.

 

Also, The UN partition Plan was rejected by all the Arab countries.

[DC Tom]

Wrong, I'll say it again, it was only after the Jews re-inhabited their historic homeland of Judea and Samaria, that the myth of a Palestinian nation was created and marketed worldwide. Jews come from Judea, not Palestinians. There is no language known as Palestinian, or any Palestinian culture distinct from that of all the Arabs in the area. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs indistinguishable from Arabs throughout the Middle East. The Palestinian National Charter adopted by the PLO states this fact in the first article.

 

Also, The UN partition Plan was rejected by all the Arab countries.

 

Okay...back to Europe, everybody. Whateverdude wants to give North America back to the Indians...

[whateverdude]

Okay...back to Europe, everybody. Whateverdude wants to give North America back to the Indians...

They are welcome to try

[DC Tom]

They are welcome to try

 

Which reminds me...anyone know what happened to that lawsuit one of the Indian nations filed about ten years back, claiming (not inaccurately, as I recall) that Grand Island belonged to them by treaty and they had the legal right to evict everyone?

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Which reminds me...anyone know what happened to that lawsuit one of the Indian nations filed about ten years back, claiming (not inaccurately, as I recall) that Grand Island belonged to them by treaty and they had the legal right to evict everyone?

 

What would they call it? Porkchopia?

[DC Tom]

Wrong, I'll say it again, it was only after the Jews re-inhabited their historic homeland of Judea and Samaria, that the myth of a Palestinian nation was created and marketed worldwide. Jews come from Judea, not Palestinians. There is no language known as Palestinian, or any Palestinian culture distinct from that of all the Arabs in the area. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs indistinguishable from Arabs throughout the Middle East. The Palestinian National Charter adopted by the PLO states this fact in the first article.

 

Also, The UN partition Plan was rejected by all the Arab countries.

 

And by the way...that's not a very good argument against the UN creating ahistorical countries via resolution, considering how many ahistorical countries have been arbitrarily created by the random imposition of map lines by colonial powers or international treaty. If you're going to argue against the UN's or England's (the colonial power actually responsible for the partition of Palestine) arbitrary right to nation-building, you have to start redrawing a LOT of the map - even if (especially if) your argument is "but this case is different, because of 5000 years of history!"

 

 

 

And see, Jim? He disagrees with me, but in a rational, thoughtful manner. Hence, not a moron. If, on the other hand, Hedd were to chime in here agreeing with everything I said...he'd still be a moron.

[Jim in Anchorage]

And by the way...that's not a very good argument against the UN creating ahistorical countries via resolution, considering how many ahistorical countries have been arbitrarily created by the random imposition of map lines by colonial powers or international treaty. If you're going to argue against the UN's or England's (the colonial power actually responsible for the partition of Palestine) arbitrary right to nation-building, you have to start redrawing a LOT of the map - even if (especially if) your argument is "but this case is different, because of 5000 years of history!"

 

 

 

And see, Jim? He disagrees with me, but in a rational, thoughtful manner. Hence, not a moron. If, on the other hand, Hedd were to chime in here agreeing with everything I said...he'd still be a moron.

I'll give it a day. You must be in a rare mood.

As far as the Indian claim on Grand island, society's fight wars. Somebody wins, somebody loses. In this case the Indians lost. Ever see a Erie Indian whine about land claims? Of course not, the Iroquois annihilated them.

[OCinBuffalo]

In all seriousness, what happened to the days where the Muslims were making great contributions to the world? Algebra, architecture, urban development, the arts, and medicine all have Muslims to thank for advancements they made way back when, while the Roman Catholic Church was busy entrenching most of Europe in the Dark Ages.

The answer to your question is in the question itself: when Rome was an Empire, they brought all sorts of technology and advancement to the Arabs. And, they kept the Arabs in line under pain of certain death. A citizen of Rome could walk across Northern Africa and not be touched. Imagine trying that as an American citizen now.

 

Arabs,(notice I am not saying Carthaginians, who were not Arabs) having been tamed and then forcibly civilized first by Roman military power, and then by trade, eventually became the keepers of that knowledge when Rome stopped being an Empire, and started becoming a theocracy. We know the rest of the story.

 

So, based on the historical evidence, the answer to your question is:

When Islam is allowed to be the only basis for ideas, Arabs = Fail.

When Arabs don't fear the consequences of f'ing with the West, Arabs = Fail.

When the free trade of goods and ideas is restricted, in the Middle East(the crossroads of the world), of all places, Arabs = Fail.

Due to their culture, when Arabs think they can get over on people, they will try.

Due to their culture, when Arabs know there's no point in trying to get over on people, they will divert their attentions to other things, and that's when the math, etc. comes about.

Because no one's ever been gang-raped without Islam being somehow involved.

 

You people are completely retarded.

So, that means that no one's ever been gang-raped with Islam being somehow involved?

 

No amount of political correctness erases reality. These people are Muslims, right or wrong. Pretending like they aren't is phony, and pointless.

Yep a lot of bad Muslims out there but lets look at the American Christian record

 

Just the highlights:

 

...

Oh, look, it's dopey ...lybob with the dopey, "But, but, but, the other kids were doing it too!" defense.

 

Do we need to haul out the history of Islamic states trying to invade the West over and over, killing millions of civilians, in the process? IF you want to total up all the dead Christians and Jews, all time, based on nothing more than Islamic greed and aggression, well, you FAIL.

 

Another fool defeated by 9th grade history....

--------------------

 

Also, what does the Christianity of the last 40 years have to do with the purposeful, consistent attacks on Americans by Islamic states for the last 40 years?

 

And, Iran has been at war with this country since the Carter Debacle. They deserve whatever they get and they certainly aren't entitled to an apology when it is their constant, pissant antagonizing of our military that caused 1(one) accident over the course of 40 years.

 

Iran is the little pest that keeps poking the big guy and running away. Sooner or later, the big guy loses his patience, and the little pest gets hit and goes down, hard. Iraq got theirs for f'ing with us, Iran is next.

That's great. You get your information and world view from chain emails.

 

BTW..."horseshit" was the only response it deserved. There's a certain irony, no doubt lost on you, in the virtues of Jews over Muslims being extolled by a freakin' Spaniard.

Yes, the irony of this is undeniable.

 

This is why people need to invest in reading a little history here and there.

 

However, on the flip side, Osama Bin Douchebag points to Spain as the seminal loss for Arabs that has caused all their problems in history. The stupidity of that is also undeniable.

Depends on who you ask.

 

But again, playing devil's advocate...the UN Partition Plan in '48 established Jewish and Arab states. Subsequently, using military action, the Jewish state annexed the Arab-designated lands and declared the state of Israel.

Yes, but that military action was initially defensive. The Arabs have been trying to destroy Israel since '48. It was only after the Jews successfully smoked the Arabs on defense, and then proceeded to go on offense, that Arab ground was taken.

 

Bottom line: the Arabs chose poorly. They got their asses kicked, and wars, just like elections, have consequences. The Arabs could have chosen to leave Israel alone in '48. They could choose to leave Israel alone now.

 

Whatever happens, if Arabs want to be = with everybody else, then, they have to accept that they have nobody else to blame but themselves for the consequences of their choices, just like everybody else.

Edited February 19, 2011 by OCinBuffalo

[Jim in Anchorage]

The answer to your question is in the question itself: when Rome was an Empire, they brought all sorts of technology and advancement to the Arabs. And, they kept the Arabs in line under pain of certain death. A citizen of Rome could walk across Northern Africa and not be touched. Imagine trying that as an American citizen now.

 

Arabs,(notice I am not saying Carthaginians, who were not Arabs) having been tamed and then forcibly civilized first by Roman military power, and then by trade, eventually became the keepers of that knowledge when Rome stopped being an Empire, and started becoming a theocracy. We know the rest of the story.

 

So, based on the historical evidence, the answer to your question is:

When Islam is allowed to be the only basis for ideas, Arabs = Fail.

When Arabs don't fear the consequences of f'ing with the West, Arabs = Fail.

When the free trade of goods and ideas is restricted, in the Middle East(the crossroads of the world), of all places, Arabs = Fail.

Due to their culture, when Arabs think they can get over on people, they will try.

Due to their culture, when Arabs know there's no point in trying to get over on people, they will divert their attentions to other things, and that's when the math, etc. comes about.

 

So, that means that no one's ever been gang-raped with Islam being somehow involved?

 

No amount of political correctness erases reality. These people are Muslims, right or wrong. Pretending like they aren't is phony, and pointless.

 

Oh, look, it's dopey ...lybob with the dopey, "But, but, but, the other kids were doing it too!" defense.

 

Do we need to haul out the history of Islamic states trying to invade the West over and over, killing millions of civilians, in the process? IF you want to total up all the dead Christians and Jews, all time, based on nothing more than Islamic greed and aggression, well, you FAIL.

 

Another fool defeated by 9th grade history....

--------------------

 

Also, what does the Christianity of the last 40 years have to do with the purposeful, consistent attacks on Americans by Islamic states for the last 40 years?

 

And, Iran has been at war with this country since the Carter Debacle. They deserve whatever they get and they certainly aren't entitled to an apology when it is their constant, pissant antagonizing of our military that caused 1(one) accident over the course of 40 years.

 

Iran is the little pest that keeps poking the big guy and running away. Sooner or later, the big guy loses his patience, and the little pest gets hit and goes down, hard. Iraq got theirs for f'ing with us, Iran is next.

 

Yes, the irony of this is undeniable.

 

This is why people need to invest in reading a little history here and there.

 

However, on the flip side, Osama Bin Douchebag points to Spain as the seminal loss for Arabs that has caused all their problems in history. The stupidity of that is also undeniable.

 

Yes, but that military action was initially defensive. The Arabs have been trying to destroy Israel since '48. It was only after the Jews successfully smoked the Arabs on defense, and then proceeded to go on offense, that Arab ground was taken.

 

Bottom line: the Arabs chose poorly. They got their asses kicked, and wars, just like elections, have consequences. The Arabs could have chosen to leave Israel alone in '48. They could choose to leave Israel alone now.

 

Whatever happens, if Arabs want to be = with everybody else, then, they have to accept that they have nobody else to blame but themselves for the consequences of their choices, just like everybody else.

Interesting informative post. I suspect DC Tom will call you a @#%& within hours. Gene, lybob, etc. who cares.

[Zulu Cthulhu]

World history infused with bigotry amuses me. Tell us more OC.

[Wacka]

Interesting informative post. I suspect DC Tom will call you a @#%& within hours. Gene, lybob, etc. who cares.

 

Who cares what the @#%& DC Tom thinks?

[DC Tom]

Who cares what the @#%& DC Tom thinks?

 

Jim does. He's overly concerned with me calling others idiots. Because...he's an idiot.

 

And no, Jim, I'm not going to call OC anything. That would force me to wade through that swamp of a post he put up.

[OCinBuffalo]

World history infused with bigotry amuses me. Tell us more OC.

Yes, yes, same old horseshit. How much of a sorry ass are you if, in this day and age, the only argument you have is "YOU'RE A RACIST!" I told you idiots that eventually you would schitalk yourselves away the "BIGOT!" attack, and now it's long gone. Again, you have no one but yourselves to blame.

 

What this really is: world history, without the lamedick, politically correct nonsense attached.

 

I would love it if you could provide a single example that contradicts any of my "....Arabs = Fail" lines. I doubt you can.

 

But, I warn you: you actually have to know world history in order to accomplish this task. In fact, I am betting it requires that you got an A in 9th grade history and/or having read something besides whatever is posted on Huffington Post today.

 

I don't think you have the ability. Let's see if I'm wrong.

 

Jim does. He's overly concerned with me calling others idiots. Because...he's an idiot.

 

And no, Jim, I'm not going to call OC anything. That would force me to wade through that swamp of a post he put up.

Also horseshit. No, Jim, that's not the real reason.

 

The real reason is Tom learned long ago that my history skillz are just as tight as his are, if not more so.

 

So that's why he won't f with me, because he knows that I wouldn't post a single bit of historical analysis here, if I couldn't back it up. Tom also knows that, because I did post history, there's no way in hell he didn't read it. And finally, after reading it, Tom knows my responses to him were accurate, because they are. Hence: "no reply, there's no reply at all."

 

Unfortunately for Zulu D-bag, he wasn't privy to this information prior to posting his lamedickery.

 

I'd give Zulu 1 chance in 8 of even coming close to posting a reasonable response.

 

Who knows? Maybe Zulu wants a shot at the conner title?

Edited February 20, 2011 by OCinBuffalo

[DC Tom]

Yes, yes, same old horseshit. How much of a sorry ass are you if, in this day and age, the only argument you have is "YOU'RE A RACIST!" I told you idiots that eventually you would schitalk yourselves away the "BIGOT!" attack, and now it's long gone. Again, you have no one but yourselves to blame.

 

What this really is: world history, without the lamedick, politically correct nonsense attached.

 

I would love it if you could provide a single example that contradicts any of my "....Arabs = Fail" lines. I doubt you can.

 

But, I warn you: you actually have to know world history in order to accomplish this task. In fact, I am betting it requires that you got an A in 9th grade history and/or having read something besides whatever is posted on Huffington Post today.

 

I don't think you have the ability. Let's see if I'm wrong.

 

 

Also horseshit. No, Jim, that's not the real reason.

 

The real reason is Tom learned long ago that my history skillz are just as tight as his are, if not more so.

 

So that's why he won't f with me, because he knows that I wouldn't post a single bit of historical analysis here, if I couldn't back it up. Tom also knows that, because I did post history, there's no way in hell he didn't read it. And finally, after reading it, Tom knows my responses to him were accurate, because they are. Hence: "no reply, there's no reply at all."

 

Unfortunately for Zulu D-bag, he wasn't privy to this information prior to posting his lamedickery.

 

I'd give Zulu 1 chance in 8 of even coming close to posting a reasonable response.

 

Who knows? Maybe Zulu wants a shot at the conner title?

 

No, I actually didn't read it. Caught a few words...thought I saw something about the Romans civilizing the Arabs (), saw a shiny object that was more interesting.

 

And though your history chops aren't insignificant, you're not in my league. Don't flatter yourself.

[Rob's House]

Yep a lot of bad Muslims out there but lets look at the American Christian record

 

Just the highlights:

 

Waged a genocidal campaign against the indigenous population and broke almost every treaty made with them.

 

Enslaved millions of Africans (and probably killed an equal number in the transatlantic voyage) and their descendants and suppressed them for about a hundred years after giving them their freedom.

 

Killed close to a million Filipinos.

 

overthrew governments in South America for the benefit of American corporations

 

Threw Japanese Americans into internment camps- and almost systematically stole their property while they were interned.

 

infected 700 unknowing Guatemalans with syphilis for std research

 

overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran and installed the Shaw

 

School of the Americas

 

encouraged and supported Iraqi war of aggression against Iran including chemical weapons

 

shot down Iranian airliner in Iranian air space killing 290, never apologized

 

killed 600,000 Iraqis and displaced 2 million more,

Well if you're going to go that route why don't we take the Canadians to task while we're at it. I mean, when was the last time they apologized for Brian Adams?

 

 

On a serious note, the overwhelming majority of middle eastern advancement came before they were muslims. Islam, regardless of your opinion/open-mindedness/head-in-the-sandedness regarding the (de)merits of it's tenets and practice, has had a technologically backwards effect on it's followers.

Edited February 21, 2011 by Rob's House