16 Dec 08
Originally posted by MerkYour cheese-and-wine, armchair hardnose riské 'stance' on this ethnic cleansing issue does not withstand any scrutiny. Say the Iranians acquired the A-Bomb and threatened to use it to kill all Israelis. And in turn the Israelis threatened to kill all Iranians. Who do you 'move'? The Iranians or the Israelis? How do you choose? Where do you move them to?
Given the choice between Isrealis killing the Palestinians or moving them, I would take moving them. Same goes if the Palestinians had the ability and desire to do both to the Joos in the future. I'd prefer moving them.
It's as if your little crackpot theorizing, delivered at the water cooler, to colleagues familiar with your self-conscious misanthropy, ends in laughter and shaking heads. "Merk. Bless him."
It seems, then, that you are actually advocating pre-emptive cooperation with groups intent on mass murder. How about if their desire to kill is rooted in racial theories, master race pretentions, notions of scientific racism, and other racial purity concepts?
In MerkWorld groups merely have to threaten mass murder of an ethnic minority or talk about designs for territorial expansion, or even start grumbling about Untermenschen, and they get your tacit approval or endorsement.
Bless you.
16 Dec 08
Originally posted by normbenignAnd this is out of the mouth of a guy who recently, on a different thread, asserted that Barack Obama was a kindred spirit of the Nazis. You don't sound like the kind of person to take lectures about "hatred" from, nor to be allowed to define the word "bizarre".
The moral equivalencies you draw are totally bizarre, and your hatred of the West and Israel are finally up front for all to see.
16 Dec 08
Originally posted by FMFOriginally posted by normbenign
Would you favour some kind of military action by the U.S. against Israel if it carried out this threat of ethnic cleansing?
That is purely a sophomoric idea.
No. It's called rhetorical conjecture. Intended to show up the fact that your professed detachment and disinterested analysis is utter nonsense and a sham.
On one hand you say No, I don't support mass deportation
Moments later you say OK, so the solution proposed seems somewhat radical. Got a better one?
On one hand you say I don't favor the solution proposed
Moments later you say I can see how [ethnic cleansing] gets mentioned as a possibility.
Textbook meally-mouthedness. What is it you think? Be clear. Stop obfuscating.
Originally posted by normbenign
I also think that moderate Arabs, whether in Israel, or elsewhere in the world must become more outspoken and demonstrative, so that they are not mistaken for being sympathetic to or in cooperation with the jihad.
Strange how, here, you indicate that you haven't been following what's going on at all. Are your sources of news mostly pro-Zionist? Probably, after all, as you yourself admit "I'm trying as best I can to get into the heads of Israelis."
16 Dec 08
Originally posted by normbenignHate to trample to trample all over your agenda, and all, but - really - in what sense are you claiming that NATO's bombing of Serbia was a "UN solution".
No one will argue that Slobadan Milosovic and his ethnic cleansing in Kosevo were a good thing, but was the UN solution of having America bomb the hell out of Serbia any better?
If you can't post truthfully or accurately about a detail like this, one wonders what else is dodgy and deceitful in your posts.
16 Dec 08
Originally posted by FMFIf the choice is between killing a people or moving them, which the better choice?
Your cheese-and-wine, armchair hardnose riské 'stance' on this ethnic cleansing issue does not withstand any scrutiny. Say the Iranians acquired the A-Bomb and threatened to use it to kill all Israelis. And in turn the Israelis threatened to kill all Iranians. Who do you 'move'? The Iranians or the Israelis? How do you choose? Where do you move them to?
It's ...[text shortened]... bout Untermenschen, and they get your tacit approval or endorsement.
Bless you.
And please, stop with all the water-cooler-dinner-party nonsense and just answer the question.
16 Dec 08
Originally posted by shavixmirLike you've ever objected to an anal raping before. 🙂
God damn.
This thread read likes being anally raped.
Anyone supporting Isreali ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians is obviously so far down the river on a banana boat, they really should just kill themselves and save me the bother.
17 Dec 08
Originally posted by MerkThat's all your gasp-at-the-audacity contrariness amounts to, water-cooler-dinner-party nonsense.
...please, stop with all the water-cooler-dinner-party nonsense and just answer the question.
Originally posted by Merk
If the choice is between killing a people or moving them, which the better choice?
Yours is to back the mass murderers and ethnic cleansers. I get you. Presumably you'd wrap it up in myths of destiny and honour, twisted historical 'analysis' underpinning claims of divinely endorsed exceptionalism, and deluded duckspeak about being an "honest broker".
And then you move on to back your next chosen mass murderer and ethnic cleanser, who has been emboldened and empowered by your edifying 'pragmatism' and free supply of auspices and armaments.
Your answer is to endorse and normalize gangsterism and make it the new End Of History.
My answer is stop the killing and resist groups that threaten to mass murder ethnic minorities or talk about designs for territorial expansion, or even start grumbling about Untermenschen. Presumably your ears would prick up and you'd think, time to warm up the cattle trucks.
Many Americans have convinced themselves that taking a stand against, and vanquishing monsters is what they stand for. But, as many of us out here have known since we started wearing long pants and thinking for ourselves, MerkWorld is far closer to the reality of Pax Americana than any of the self-righteous myths and delusions that Americans inculcate themselves with.