Justice Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I can get you a list of the primary sources when I get home from work (if I have time - I've moved on from the window to building new kitchen cabinets this week). A good secondary source to start is "Arabs at War," which, although military rather than political history, covers the run-up to the 1967 war from the Syrian and Egyptian side rather well. I just did a quick check on the writer of "Arabs at War", Kenneth Pollack. A former CIA intelligence analyst ( there's a non-biased source) and advocate of attacking Iraq because, (wait while I laugh), the Iraqis had WMD's, Real nice source, Very credible. LOL!!!!! Whatever. No wonder you have the opinions you do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I just did a quick check on the writer of "Arabs at War", Kenneth Pollack. A former CIA intelligence analyst ( there's a non-biased source) and advocate of attacking Iraq because, (wait while I laugh), the Iraqis had WMD's, Real nice source, Very credible. LOL!!!!! Whatever. No wonder you have the opinions you do. Yeah, I've noticed that about you. You argue to authority (or against, as the case may be), because you're incapable of forming your own opinions. I'm perfectly capable of discounting Pollack's bias in his own writing...particularly in a scholarly work well-referenced with primary sources, and regardless of his idiotic stance on invading Iraq. Unlike you, who...well, like I said, you can only argue to authority, you clearly can't form a thought of your own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pBills Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I just did a quick check on the writer of "Arabs at War", Kenneth Pollack. A former CIA intelligence analyst ( there's a non-biased source) and advocate of attacking Iraq because, (wait while I laugh), the Iraqis had WMD's, Real nice source, Very credible. LOL!!!!! Whatever. No wonder you have the opinions you do. Don't argue with Tom. He is an expert everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Yeah, I've noticed that about you. You argue to authority (or against, as the case may be), because you're incapable of forming your own opinions. I'm perfectly capable of discounting Pollack's bias in his own writing...particularly in a scholarly work well-referenced with primary sources, and regardless of his idiotic stance on invading Iraq. Unlike you, who...well, like I said, you can only argue to authority, you clearly can't form a thought of your own. I just did, minion, that guy has no credibility whatsoever. Where did he get his info on Iraq's WMD's? He got it from someone, right? He didn't see them for himself, because they weren't there. What else did his "sources" get wrong? Don't argue with Tom. He is an expert everything. For real. This dude is amazing! Brilliant! He can't be stopped!! The guy is a brain! I'm just honored to be in his presence. My life will never be the same again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I just did, minion, that guy has no credibility whatsoever. Where did he get his info on Iraq's WMD's? He got it from someone, right? He didn't see them for himself, because they weren't there. What else did his "sources" get wrong? Where did you get the info on his views on Iraq? Face it, you don't know **** about him. Or his book I referenced (which, as I said, was based on ARAB sources). You can't speak to the subject of his writings at ALL...because you've already discredited without reading anything he's written. You'd probably be surprised to find out you and he agree on Middle East policy more often than not. The big difference being...his opinions are informed. Yours are completely asinine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Where did you get the info on his views on Iraq? Face it, you don't know **** about him. Or his book I referenced (which, as I said, was based on ARAB sources). You can't speak to the subject of his writings at ALL...because you've already discredited without reading anything he's written. You'd probably be surprised to find out you and he agree on Middle East policy more often than not. The big difference being...his opinions are informed. Yours are completely asinine. If it's good enough for our judicial system, it's good enough for me. Discredit the witness, he if can be discredited, which Kenneth Pollack certainly is. Why don't you try reading some books written by guys with no interest in the matter? Seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 (edited) I'm going to do DCTom's next post for him. You're an idiot...yada yada yada....I'm intelligent yada yada yada...I'm going home to rebuild my house by hand yada yada yada I form my own opinions yada yada yada About right? Edited June 1, 2011 by b.harami98 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 If it's good enough for our judicial system, it's good enough for me. Discredit the witness, he if can be discredited, which Kenneth Pollack certainly is. Why don't you try reading some books written by guys with no interest in the matter? Seriously. Because generally, in any subject, people with "no interest in the matter" are uninformed. And heresay isn't allowed in our judicial system, even to "discredit the witness." Which is what you're engaging in, since you have absolutely no first-hand knowledge about the guy or his writing (really, you think his analysis of the Egyptian operations in Yemen are discredited as well, becuase he argued for invading Iraq?) Even your "courtroom tactic" wouldn't stand up in court. You really are mentally challenged. I'm going to do DCTom's next post for him. You're an idiot...yada yada yada....I'm intelligent yada yada yada...I'm going home to rebuild my house by hand yada yada yada I form my own opinions yada yada yada About right? More illustrative of your lack of reading comprehension than anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Because generally, in any subject, people with "no interest in the matter" are uninformed. And heresay isn't allowed in our judicial system, even to "discredit the witness." Which is what you're engaging in, since you have absolutely no first-hand knowledge about the guy or his writing (really, you think his analysis of the Egyptian operations in Yemen are discredited as well, becuase he argued for invading Iraq?) Even your "courtroom tactic" wouldn't stand up in court. You really are mentally challenged. More illustrative of your lack of reading comprehension than anything. So, he didn't write a book entitled, "The Threatening Storm", regarding his thoughts on invading Iraq? That isn't hearsay, (that's how it's spelled, BTW), you bumbling buffoon. He wrote the damn book! And I'm the one that's mentally challenged? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I'm going to do DCTom's next post for him. You're an idiot...yada yada yada....I'm intelligent yada yada yada...I'm going home to rebuild my house by hand yada yada yada I form my own opinions yada yada yada About right? You Palestinians like to throw rocks (in this case metaphorically speaking) don't you? Why inflame when it isn't going to do any good? I also see that you haven't stated any opinion re the closing of the Straits of Tiran or Nassar's declaration of his intention to obliterate Israel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 So, he didn't write a book entitled, "The Threatening Storm", regarding his thoughts on invading Iraq? That isn't hearsay, (that's how it's spelled, BTW), you bumbling buffoon. He wrote the damn book! And I'm the one that's mentally challenged? Yes, it is. And yes you are. Because you DIDN'T READ THE BOOK, nitwit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 (edited) You Palestinians like to throw rocks (in this case metaphorically speaking) don't you? Why inflame when it isn't going to do any good? I also see that you haven't stated any opinion re the closing of the Straits of Tiran or Nassar's declaration of his intention to obliterate Israel. Nice job with the stereotyping! The cousin of racism! Sweet!!! I already said I can't answer that question, so why do some of you keep asking it? I know nothing about those other countries and I wasn't a part of their government, so how am I supposed to know? Boy, there sure are a lot of Kevin Costners on this board. Yes, it is. And yes you are. Because you DIDN'T READ THE BOOK, nitwit. You can't even spell the word correctly, much less school me on what it means. Besides, I never said I would discredit the guy in court by getting someone else to quote his book, I'd get Kenneth Pollack on the witness stand and let him do it himself. Edited June 1, 2011 by b.harami98 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Nice job with the stereotyping! The cousin of racism! Sweet!!! I already said I can't answer that question, so why do some of you keep asking it? I know nothing about those other countries and I wasn't a part of their government, so how am I supposed to know? Boy, there sure are a lot of Kevin Costners on this board. You can't even spell the word correctly, much less school me on what it means. Besides, I never said I would discredit the guy in court by getting someone else to quote his book, I'd get Kenneth Pollack on the witness stand and let him do it himself. Quit being so sensitive. My point was that you were needlessly stirring the pot. Claiming racism so easily makes me think that you might have had a lot of practice being the "victim". So, you know nothing about those other countries but you claim to know all about the Palestinian/Israeli situation? You can't read about it or even speculate why Israel would be angry over the Straits of Tiran being closed or Nassar stating that he would obliterate Israel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Quit being so sensitive. My point was that you were needlessly stirring the pot. Claiming racism so easily makes me think that you might have had a lot of practice being the "victim". So, you know nothing about those other countries but you claim to know all about the Palestinian/Israeli situation? You can't read about it or even speculate why Israel would be angry over the Straits of Tiran being closed or Nassar stating that he would obliterate Israel? I'm not that sensitive. I'm not calling you a racist, either. Stereotyping isn't cool. Actually, I have never felt what it's like to be discriminated against in the US, now Israel, that's a different story. I apologize if it sounded like I called you a racist. I was just making a statement that stereotyping is a cousin of racism, I didn't call you a racist. I'll try to catch up on some of that other stuff, later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I'm not that sensitive. I'm not calling you a racist, either. Stereotyping isn't cool. Actually, I have never felt what it's like to be discriminated against in the US, now Israel, that's a different story. I apologize if it sounded like I called you a racist. I was just making a statement that stereotyping is a cousin of racism, I didn't call you a racist. I'll try to catch up on some of that other stuff, later. Fair enough. Please figure out why they made the preemptive strike. It might make you a little more insightful and a lot less inciteful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Question for you, what do you call the Arabs that live in the West Bank and Gaza? Palestinians, right? Well Palestinians should live in a place called PALESTINE or give us equal rights. Like I said, I can care less if we ever get our country back, just treat us like you treat yourselves and eventually, over time, we can live in peace. What are we going to give them? Peace and peace of mind. Isn't that enough? Israel gave Gaza back, and Hamas is perfectly free to give its population equal rights in Gaza. When the land swap deal is done, Abbas ot whoever is "elected" will be perfectly free to give equal rights in West Bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 I'm not that sensitive. I'm not calling you a racist, either. Stereotyping isn't cool. Actually, I have never felt what it's like to be discriminated against in the US, now Israel, that's a different story. I apologize if it sounded like I called you a racist. I was just making a statement that stereotyping is a cousin of racism, I didn't call you a racist. I'll try to catch up on some of that other stuff, later. Is Racism's mom's brother the father of stereotyping? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Fair enough. Please figure out why they made the preemptive strike. It might make you a little more insightful and a lot less inciteful. Maybe so, but I take exception with that "inciteful" remark. I treat people here with respect and that's the way I expect to be treated. As you can see in this thread that I repeatedly warned DCTom about his insults and tried to stop my little spat with him a few times, but he just continues to ask for it. If anyone's inciteful, it's him. Why not reprimand Tom? Because you share his views or is it that you just favor him? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Maybe so, but I take exception with that "inciteful" remark. I treat people here with respect and that's the way I expect to be treated. As you can see in this thread that I repeatedly warned DCTom about his insults and tried to stop my little spat with him a few times, but he just continues to ask for it. If anyone's inciteful, it's him. Why not reprimand Tom? Because you share his views or is it that you just favor him? Post 146 from you was followed up with Post 147 from you and I view the content as inciteful. Tom knows what he is and I was having the conversation with you, not him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justice Posted June 1, 2011 Share Posted June 1, 2011 Post 146 from you was followed up with Post 147 from you and I view the content as inciteful. Tom knows what he is and I was having the conversation with you, not him. That doesn't change the fact that I tried to end the beef well before post 147. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts