User Tag List

First 789101119 Last

Results 81 to 90 of 341

  1. #81
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by eagleseven View Post
    Your issue, then, is with the blockade in general, rather than this individual incident?
    Both. This latest high-profile crime -an unprecedented escalation in that it meant the killing, injury and arrest of hundreds of activists from around the world, in international waters - highlights to the world what is happening to the Palestinians day to day and shows the increasing impunity which Israel presumes to enjoy.
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  2. #82
    psicobolche tcda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    MBTI
    intp
    Enneagram
    5
    Posts
    1,292

    Default

    Israelis celebrating outside Turkish embassy (video):

    LENIN'S TOMB

    Looks like a sizeable contingent of jubilant Israelis turned up outside the Turkish embassy in Tel Aviv to party down after Israel's assault on the aid flotilla:

    How sad for them that they didn't have the opportunity to watch the assault from afar, perched on deckchairs, binoculars in hand, as some of their compatriots did during Cast Lead.
    "Of course we spent our money in the good times. That's what you're supposed to do in good times! You can't save money in the good times. Then they wouldn't be good times, they'd be 'preparation for the bad times' times."

    "Every country in the world owes money. Everyone. So heere's what I dont get: who do they all owe it to, and why don't we just kill the bastard and relax?"

    -Tommy Tiernan, Irish comedian.

  3. #83
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacuss View Post
    Incorrect. I suggested that fear is as or more plausible a state of mind
    The point is not worth debating. Wait for the information to come out.

    You don't say! Got any more straw where that came from?
    So you believe attacking with knives and steel pipes is not lethal force?

    There was no violence - "mob" or otherwise - until the IDF agents got on the flotilla,
    The activists announced their intention to run the blockade. That gives Israel reason to search their vessel. That's how blockades work.

  4. #84
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcda View Post
    Likewise the people on the hsip had a mission, they wanted to take aid to Gaza, why the hell shoudl they let some soldiers jsut march in and take over the ship?
    What's the use of having a blockade if it's not enforced? The activists clearly announced their intent to cross. That gives the Israelis cause to board and search their vessel. Every country does this.

    your argument amounts to "don't stand up to the IDF, they'll only kill you".
    No. There are rules of engagement. If you intend to run a country's blockade, you can expect to be boarded. If you resist with deadly force, then you can expect reciprocation.

    Are you denying they shot with live ammunition now?
    Obviously that is not the point of contention. It's whether the commandos were justified to defend themselves using deadly force against the attacking mob.

    The explanations are clear: Israel wants to crush opposition at all costs.
    I don't necessarily endorse all tactics employed by Israel. But they do have the rights to mount an effectively defense even against a much weaker opponent.

  5. #85
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ragashree View Post
    Phillosophically, it amounts to "Might is Right". Fallacy-wise it's an example of the Ad Baculum or appeal to force, combined with the appeal to consequences, which is the formal fallacy here.
    No. In this scenario, there are many principles at play which might support Israel's position. The "appeal to force" was never used to support the ethical validity of any point.

    Analogy:
    If I caught you shoplifting from my store, do I have the right to chop off your hands on the spot? If I tried to do so, should you have the right to shoot me if necessary?

  6. #86
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcda View Post
    Israelis celebrating outside Turkish embassy (video):
    There are idiots on all sides. It reminds me of the celebration when the trade center was attacked.

  7. #87
    wholly charmed Spartacuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    The point is not worth debating. Wait for the information to come out.
    My sentiments exactly, and that's quite a reversal from your initial biased, bald assertion about what was going through the heads of the now dead. Maybe you should have heeded your own advice before.


    So you believe attacking with knives and steel pipes is not lethal force?
    I see you do have quite a bit of straw where that came from, much in the vein of your vulgar characterization of my position as "if you are afraid you are entitled to attack (any level of force) with deadly force solely on this basis."

    Presumptuousness.

    The activists announced their intention to run the blockade. That gives Israel reason to search their vessel. That's how blockades work.
    The legality of IDF's boarding is a matter of dispute, though to hear you tell it (what a surprise, given your earlier bias) it's cut and dry.
    Ti (43); Ne (41.8); Te (33.7); Fi (30.5); Ni (27.5); Se (24.7); Si (21.5); Fe (17.3)
    The More You Know the Less You Need. - Aboriginal Saying

  8. #88
    Reason vs Being ragashree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    Mine
    Enneagram
    1w9
    Posts
    1,770

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    No. In this scenario, there are many principles at play which might support Israel's position. The "appeal to force" was never used to support the ethical validity of any point.
    It was, though as I said the formal fallacy of the appeal to consequence is more relevant. You're not even nitpicking sucessfully here:

    Originally Posted by tcda
    why should they peacefully lie back and let the Israelis invade their ship in international waters when they had no authority wehatsoever to do so and which posed no threat at all to the Israelis?
    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    Because reacting with lethal force will result in reciprocation from the other side. It's simply prudent to keep your cool.
    Or are you now going to claim that "should" statements are not loaded with an implication of ethical correctness?

    Analogy:
    If I caught you shoplifting from my store, do I have the right to chop off your hands on the spot? If I tried to do so, should you have the right to shoot me if necessary?
    Ockham's razor applies. But if you like you can try applying your above principle to your own scenario and seeing how it undermines the fundamental right to self-defense in any case.
    Look into my avatar. Look deep into my avatar...

  9. #89
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    MBTI
    INTj
    Posts
    1,650

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartacuss View Post
    My sentiments exactly, and that's quite a reversal from your initial biased, bald assertion about what was going through the heads of the now dead. Maybe you should have heeded your own advice before.
    I did not say my opinion has changed. I simply don't think it's interesting to debate something that is best decided by viewing the videos and reports. How often have you seen mob violence motivated by fear?

    I see you do have quite a bit of straw where that came from, much in the vein of your vulgar characterization of my position as "if you are afraid you are entitled to attack (any level of force) with deadly force solely on this basis."
    On what basis were you justifying the mob's extreme violence against the commandos? You listed two reasons, the defense of ones private space against unauthorized entry and the fear for one's safety. In the latter case, I was arguing that the fear must have a rational basis. Otherwise it is unjustified. It's not a strawman.

    The legality of IDF's boarding is a matter of dispute, though to hear you tell it (what a surprise, given your earlier bias) it's cut and dry.
    [/quote]
    You seem to express moral indignation at my arguments rather than present logical refutations. This is a very nonproductive way to debate.

  10. #90
    wholly charmed Spartacuss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4
    Posts
    677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Not_Me View Post
    I did not say my opinion has changed. I simply don't think it's interesting to debate something that is best decided by viewing the videos and reports.
    What has changed is the conclusory nature of your loaded, unlikely inference on a matter you can know nothing of (that the state of mind of people on a flotilla confronted by agents they routinely accuse of heavy handedness was not fear for their safety but some kind of suicidal, belligerent wish to make a pre-emptive attack on the IDF, with all its machinery)
    How often have you seen mob violence motivated by fear?
    it usually is



    On what basis were you justifying the mob's extreme violence against the commandos?
    That's the very thing - You keep making statements on my behalf when I 'm perfectly capable of making them if I'd wished to do so. Then you argue with these statements you've made. Straw men.

    What I did question is your foregone conclusion that they are not blameless. Truth (I hope) will out.

    You seem to express moral indignation at my arguments rather than present logical refutations.
    My sole aim is to point out that your "statement of fact" of international law is mere opinion, not settled matter of law, as you would present it. I find it intellectually repugnant to present it as such.

    This is a very nonproductive way to debate.
    I'm not debating you. Just showing up the aforementioned repugnance.
    Ti (43); Ne (41.8); Te (33.7); Fi (30.5); Ni (27.5); Se (24.7); Si (21.5); Fe (17.3)
    The More You Know the Less You Need. - Aboriginal Saying

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 02-17-2009, 06:45 PM
  2. The Murder of God
    By Mole in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 44
    Last Post: 12-14-2008, 02:56 AM
  3. Do you make a lot of T.V. references in conversations?
    By ladypinkington in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 08-27-2008, 12:23 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO