Israel's "national solution" for Israel's A...

Originally posted by FMF
Interetsing kind of self-steem you have there, my friend.

True to form you are.

Originally posted by Merk
True to form you are.

Interesting how when pressed people without an argument will pretend they've made one.

Also interesting is that this entire debate stems from a random, out of context statement of one Israeli official, not a seriously considered or proposed solution.

The other side however has repeated issued statements clearly delineating the duty of all Muslims to kill the infidels, and to remove Israel from the map and drive every Jew into the sea.

The moral and ethical parallels this guy promotes as rational arguments boggle the mind, and of course when all else fails, attack and belittle the messenger, and misrepresent the message.

Who in their right mind would look back at the Rwanda massacres of Tutsis and say it was better to leave them to be slaughtered than to help them escape?

Originally posted by normbenign
Also interesting is that this entire debate stems from a random, out of context statement of one Israeli official, not a seriously considered or proposed solution.

The, er... one Israeli official was Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, touted by most observers as a future Prime Minister. And claiming it has been taken out of context is one of the laziest political cliches in the book. It means: 'I said what I really think and I'm getting flak for it".

As for it not being "a seriously considered or proposed solution", well, paradoxically enough the poster you are addressing in your post (above) does consider it to be a serious solution. So, after several attempts to feign a pompous objectivity, you're siding here with the thread's advocate of ethnic cleansing.

Originally posted by normbenign
The moral and ethical parallels this guy promotes as rational arguments boggle the mind, and of course when all else fails, attack and belittle the messenger, and misrepresent the message.

(Belittle the messenger? Well now you come to mention it, I will, seeing as it is entirely germane).

The moral and ethical parallels this guy promotes as rational arguments boggle the mind

Bit rich, perhaps, coming from a guy like you who recently, on a different thread, asserted that Barack Obama is a kindred spirit of the Nazis. You don't sound like the kind of person to take lectures about "moral and ethical parallels" from, nor a guy we should trust to define what "rational arguments" are or are not.

I wear my ability to boggle your mind as a badge of honour in my battle with the badly-brought up ultra-bigots that infest this forum. (No offence intended).

Originally posted by normbenign
Interesting how when pressed people without an argument will pretend they've made one.

Also interesting is that this entire debate stems from a random, out of context statement of one Israeli official, not a seriously considered or proposed solution.

The other side however has repeated issued statements clearly delineating the duty of all Muslims to ...[text shortened]... acres of Tutsis and say it was better to leave them to be slaughtered than to help them escape?

Your question is a good one, but no one will answer it for some reason.

IT's not about debate anymore, it's about seeing if FMF can go without having the last word.

Originally posted by normbenign
Who in their right mind would look back at the Rwanda massacres of Tutsis and say it was better to leave them to be slaughtered than to help them escape?

I have been mulling over this parallel you drew between Rwanda's Hutus and the Israelis. If, as you appear to insinuate, the Arab Israelis face a fate similar to the Tutsis, doesn't that throw a different light on the much debated benefits to the region of Iran acquiring a nuclear bomb. Might it not deter Israel? Might it not both prevent the mass slaughter you and Merk seem to foresee, and turn future Israeli Prime Minister Tzipi Livni's tentative proposal to engage in ethnic cleansing into a non-option. Nuclear weapons are about deterrence, as the West has argued for decades. Who in their right mind would look back at the Rwanda massacres of Tutsis and say it was better to leave them to be ethnically cleansed than to have deterred the Hutus?