What were the consequences of Israel's attack on the Gaza Aid Flotilla?

[HossamCFD]

Now think why Mubarak is still in power, maybe it's Israel fault?(Although we did build for you the pyramids) No I think it's Egyptians fault...
..

Yes indeed, it's the Egyptians fault. I am not the kind of guy that blame others for his own mistakes/laziness. But it's not a secret that many Israeli politicians have raised concerns about about his health situation and who is going to succeed him . It's also not a secret that He has full support from the Obama's administration as opposed to the general public opinion in the US who are not happy with their government supporting a dictatorial regime

 

[HossamCFD]

Why plural?

My bad

English is not my native language anyway

 

[jreelawg]

First I'd like to say, that pretty much everyone has blinders on of different sorts. How you were raised, your religion, your culture, how the people around you rub off on you, where your news sources come from, what experiences you've been through. If you are asking what is the correct way to look at the world, it depends. Going to the military, and losing friends may give you some perspective, but I don't see how it better educates you to make political decisions less your hatred of the enemy has inspired you to be ruthless to them. your glasses are just as much blinders as someone different than you, and they appeal to your strong emotions based on your experiences. In some cases, your glasses can make you a bit nutty and irrational.

 

[zomgwtf]

First I'd like to say, that pretty much everyone has blinders on of different sorts. How you were raised, your religion, your culture, how the people around you rub off on you, where your news sources come from, what experiences you've been through. If you are asking what is the correct way to look at the world, it depends. Going to the military, and losing friends may give you some perspective, but I don't see how it better educates you to make political decisions less your hatred of the enemy has inspired you to be ruthless to them. your glasses are just as much blinders as someone different than you, and they appeal to your strong emotions based on your experiences.

I don't htink this is really true. Looking at it with blinders on means you judge the actions just for the actions. Looking at things objectively means taking a step back and thinking critically about what has happened. No appeal to emotions, no appeal to ideologies, just hard facts and knowledge of human nature.

 

[estro]

I really don't know if you are serious about this or just joking.

You have great sense for humor...
I'm aware of the fact that Jews probably has nothing to do with pyramids...

...
the Hebrews, did not even exist until centuries after that, let alone coming to Egypt.

I think some guys need to learn some history.

You're right, some history reading can only make you good...

 

[jreelawg]

I guess I'm talking about peoples perspectives on a broader scale. Maybe I'm using the terms incorrectly. But everything in life is not so clear cut. If you are entirely objective like you say, then you would have no opinion. I'm talking making assumptions of right and wrong, and so forth, and not specifically about the topic of this thread.

Also, what specifically is unique to people with different views in many cases, is their views and understanding of human nature. Maybe the military gives you strong opinions and experiences about human nature which are skewed in the broader picture. The same can be said for pretty much everyone, with their own specific factors.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Exactly, but this just isn't something you're going to convince a ideological teenager of, especially one that lives is a very nice and developed nation . Some people truly believe all the worlds problems are 'non-sense' and never require fighting... there's always 'another better route that doesn't involve deaths'. 10% of the time, this may be the case... the majority of the time though... I'm highly skeptical.

Nothing in war needs to be proportional. A MAJOR component of war theory is exactly the opposite actually, intentionally make things unproportional IN YOUR FAVOUR so you can win the damned thing. I suggest people on these forums read a few notable philosophers on war. Starting with the classics: Sun Tzu "The Art of War' and von Clausewitz "On War". You could then move into more complex theories of modern warfare after you understand the basics.

Or you QUESTION what's been established and worked out instead of learning and embracing "the old wisdoms" and then dancing along in a crowd, hand in hand, in a merry tune for the good of Imperialism.

So what if it's established war theory, and the best way of winning the war? Why is winning the war always the best thing? Why is it important that the enemy's side dies rather than your own, even if it means that a hundred times as many enemies will die?

There are ALWAYS alternatives to a head-on assault (in before you point out a specific exception). This conflict is vastly, vastly more complicated than "one side is shooting at the other", and you are fully aware of that. It is a conflict of territory, history, culture, and religion. The problem is that Hamas has gained a following among the general population, through various strategies. KILLING the general population seems to be of dubious effectivity in order to reduce that support, considering Hamas' whole rhethoric is about retaliation.

But what do I know, I'm just an ideological teenager in a first-world country.

 

[jreelawg]

The problem with war philosophies like Tsun Tsu, is that war is hell, and most people don't want to live in a constant state of war. Especially under a philosophy where lying, being sneaky, and stabbing in the back is the best method.

Most people come out of the military with the belief instilled into them, that there is no choice in the matter, war is the way of the world, and always will be.

But what you see also, is an escalation coming from both sides.

For example, if you are fighting an enemy in combat, and your best friends all die in front of you at the hand of the enemy. You might come out of the situation with the view that piece is not good enough, it doesn't accommodate the revenge you lust for.

And on the other side, a man may be kneeling beside the body parts of his child thinking the same thing, peace is not good enough without revenge.

In the end, you have a whole lot of people just out to destroy each other.

Then you have the people who realize the faults and confusions of the individual, and take the stance they cannot learn. They say the only way to peace is though war and tyranny, or through fascism. To advance this method, they egg on the confused individuals and perpetuate their faults and weakness. Kind of like the sith lord would. And meanwhile, the truths and strengths of human nature take a back seat in a world that chooses to make them irrelevant.

 

[tiny-tim]

Israelis = Nazis?

The Israeli's are acting toward the people of Gaza as the Nazi's did to the Jews or have they forgotten.

To use Nazi's as a comparison was a mistake to which I humbly apologise.

No, it was not a "mistake".

I agree. It was clearly deliberate … deliberately offensive and bizarrely untrue.

I am just disgusted with the heavy handed tactics which cost lives when a shot across the bow would have avoided loss of any life.

A shot across the bow? That is ridiculous … the ship would have refused to stop anyway, and called the Israelis' bluff.

Nobody on that ship believed that the Israelis wanted to sink it
i] because they know the Israelis tend to try to use minimum force (as they did anyway on this occasion )
ii] because the Israelis wanted the food and medicines to get to Gaza, which would not be achieved by sinking the ship.

The Israeli soldiers, far from being heavy-handed, acted with considerable restraint, leaving their firearms holstered far longer than any neighbouring army would have done, despite sustaining serious injuries.

Paradoxically, if they had been heavy-handed, firing weapons from the start, there would probably have been no deaths.

 

[Office_Shredder]

So what if it's established war theory, and the best way of winning the war? Why is winning the war always the best thing? Why is it important that the enemy's side dies rather than your own, even if it means that a hundred times as many enemies will die?

Are you suggesting that people should allow themselves to be killed for the purposes of ensuring the smallest total number of people be killed?

 

[OmCheeto]

Why is winning the war always the best thing?

Sometimes it's not. See Vietnam.

Why is it important that the enemy's side dies rather than your own, even if it means that a hundred times as many enemies will die?

Because sometimes, people are so nationalistic/patriotic that it seems that they will fight to the last person before they will give up. See Hiroshima/Nagasaki.

There are ALWAYS alternatives to a head-on assault (in before you point out a specific exception). This conflict is vastly, vastly more complicated than "one side is shooting at the other", and you are fully aware of that. It is a conflict of territory, history, culture, and religion. The problem is that Hamas has gained a following among the general population, through various strategies. KILLING the general population seems to be of dubious effectivity in order to reduce that support, considering Hamas' whole rhethoric is about retaliation.

Very good. I think?

But what do I know, I'm just an ideological teenager in a first-world country.

And that's your http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q29YR5-t3gg".

-------------------------
my apologies for introducing a music video into the thread, but I couldn't resist.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

Are you suggesting that people should allow themselves to be killed for the purposes of ensuring the smallest total number of people be killed?

I don't know. I honestly don't know. But it always gets me when people get so bloody worked up because it's about THEIR people. And it's not just in war. Recently, the somewhat arising xenophobia in Sweden has raised similar feelings within me - People get so damned worked up about what is WE, what is SWEDISH, and what is FOREIGN and EVIL.What I do know is that there is no real way to win a war, only various ways of losing it.

Om: My opinions will certainly change with the years, as they always have. But I am quite certain that they will not move further toward the support of the ever imperialistic institutions in the West.

 

[jreelawg]

With Israel, things are a bit different than a lot of other places in that there is very little hope for peace in the long term. There are too many muslim nations around them to kill them all. They really do have little choice it seams but to live in a constant state of war. This is why I don't think Helena Thomas is being racist, maybe ignorant, when she says Jews should leave Israel and go to other countries. For their own good it might be the best thing. Especially when you consider the way technology is advancing so fast, and weapons proliferation is going to be such a tough issue. Their neighbors are willing to die for revenge, and are only getting more and more blood thirsty.

Hopefully there will be some kind of transcending factor which will bring piece, but you really cannot count on that.

 

[ibnsos]

I don't know. I honestly don't know. But it always gets me when people get so bloody worked up because it's about THEIR people. And it's not just in war. Recently, the somewhat arising xenophobia in Sweden has raised similar feelings within me - People get so damned worked up about what is WE, what is SWEDISH, and what is FOREIGN and EVIL.


What I do know is that there is no real way to win a war, only various ways of losing it.

Om: My opinions will certainly change with the years, as they always have. But I am quite certain that they will not move further toward the support of the ever imperialistic institutions in the West.

Absolutly. We should all just submit to sharia law and convert to islam or accept our place as beneath those that do convert. This shall insure minimal loss of life and we can console ourselves with the knowledge that we are all people of the world...

 

[TubbaBlubba]

With Israel, things are a bit different than a lot of other places in that there is very little hope for peace in the long term. There are too many muslim nations around them to kill them all. They really do have little choice it seams but to live in a constant state of war. This is why I don't think Helena Thomas is being racist, maybe ignorant, when she says Jews should leave Israel and go to other countries. For their own good it might be the best thing. Especially when you consider the way technology is advancing so fast, and weapons proliferation is going to be such a tough issue. Their neighbors are willing to die for revenge, and are only getting more and more blood thirsty.

Hopefully there will be some kind of transcending factor which will bring piece, but you really cannot count on that.

You do have a good point in this. Regardless of what happens with the Gaza strip and how you feel about that, when that story's over then the next will start. Creating Israel was probably a pretty bad move in the first place, but there's not much to be done about it now... And meanwhile America will fight to the last drop of blood to keep their military base-, erh, Israel afloat.

Indeed, whatever would be required for peace in the Middle East would be a change significant enough for the entire world to feel it.

ibnosis: What you say has absolutely nothing to do with what I said, so I'm not quite following you.

 

[zomgwtf]

Om: My opinions will certainly change with the years, as they always have. But I am quite certain that they will not move further toward the support of the ever imperialistic institutions in the West.

I believe I've asked you for sources to support these imperialistic aims of Israel and you have yet to substantiate the it. In fact it seems like it is a common recurring pattern in this thread with yourself... actually on the entire forum, I never see you back up anything with citations, even when asked.

Start supporting your theories or else I think I'm going to start reporting posts, cause it's getting kind of over done now.

Anyway: I for one, certainly do not give a f*** how people live culturally or what they value over in the Middle East, if they try to bring this into my nation through wars and terrorism and constant bombings then, yes. I will go in there and **** their **** up.

 

[Office_Shredder]

And meanwhile America will fight to the last drop of blood to keep their military base-, erh, Israel afloat.

America hasn't dropped much blood fighting for Israel. Money, certainly, but not a lot of blood

 

[estro]

...
America will fight to the last drop of blood to keep their military base-, erh, Israel afloat...

America hasn't dropped much blood fighting for Israel. Money, certainly, but not a lot of blood

I hope until the last dollar.

I'm actually quiet surprised for good by the forum, never thought there are so many people abroad who understand our position.

 

[arildno]

The problem with war philosophies like Tsun Tsu, is that war is hell, and most people don't want to live in a constant state of war. Especially under a philosophy where lying, being sneaky, and stabbing in the back is the best method.

Most people come out of the military with the belief instilled into them, that there is no choice in the matter, war is the way of the world, and always will be.

But what you see also, is an escalation coming from both sides.

For example, if you are fighting an enemy in combat, and your best friends all die in front of you at the hand of the enemy. You might come out of the situation with the view that piece is not good enough, it doesn't accommodate the revenge you lust for.

And on the other side, a man may be kneeling beside the body parts of his child thinking the same thing, peace is not good enough without revenge.

In the end, you have a whole lot of people just out to destroy each other.

Then you have the people who realize the faults and confusions of the individual, and take the stance they cannot learn. They say the only way to peace is though war and tyranny, or through fascism. To advance this method, they egg on the confused individuals and perpetuate their faults and weakness. Kind of like the sith lord would. And meanwhile, the truths and strengths of human nature take a back seat in a world that chooses to make them irrelevant.

A very important post, and I'll make a first comment:

(a) war is hell, and (b) most people don't want to live in a constant state of war.

Both (a) and (b) correct. That is why MOST people will do their best not to think of war, even if it occurs right in the neighbourhood. The stories of the baffling "normality of life" in war-torn London or other area are endless.
This unwillingness of reflecting upon war is a source of strength needed to build up a humane, civil society again/keep it going.

That is why we should be DEEPLY troubled about wide-spread ideologies romantizing/gloryfying, or, even, the worst of all, SANCTIFYING war, since this mentality attacks the very core of our basic humanity. People imbibed&indoctrinated on such ideologies are unwittingly slipping into collective psychopathy.


This is not mere hypothesizing:
1. The gory rituals of the Aztecs, their murderous ravagings of subject tribes is one such example.

2. We have preserved thousands of lines of Viking poetry; the nobility in those societies developed a death cult, and praised&practised it.
One such ritual in the Wotan worship was "catching the babe on the spear-edge":
In this, at some village they had just razed, the Vikings would place themselves in a closed ring with their spears upright.
Then a villager child, two years old or so, was thrown into the air above the ring.
The man whose spear skewered the child was granted the right to rape the child's mother.

One Viking was tauntingly nick-named "kiddie-lover" by his comrades, because he always refused to take part in that particular ritual.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

America hasn't dropped much blood fighting for Israel. Money, certainly, but not a lot of blood

Fair enough.

I believe I've asked you for sources to support these imperialistic aims of Israel and you have yet to substantiate the it. In fact it seems like it is a common recurring pattern in this thread with yourself... actually on the entire forum, I never see you back up anything with citations, even when asked.

Start supporting your theories or else I think I'm going to start reporting posts, cause it's getting kind of over done now.

I wasn't speaking specifically of Israel, but rather the West in general. At least when looking at America, I think that the theme of imperialism is pretty self-evident, and has been going on since... The end of World War II, maybe, starting with Japan? Then moving on to Korea, then unsuccessfully Vietnam, not to mention Chile, etc etc etc, escalating in Afghanistan and Iraq. It's the whole idea that "We" bring our superior ideas to "them" in order to improve their quality of life (which can probably objectively be considered lower, regardless of culture).

It seems common to immediately assume that the individual, rather than perhaps the sociological constructs, are superior. "My standard of living is better because MY ideas on society are better!". Well, YOU didn't think most of those ideas up - you had someone else give them to you.

So let's superimpose this onto say, Iran, with all of its Sharia laws. The people didn't think these laws were the best - They were the laws that they were given. Many of them were certainly also given the thoughts that the west and its ideals are bad. So what happens with a head-on confrontation? Well, it's not unlikely that it results in STRENGTHENING the idea that the west is bad.

I'm not sure what citations you want. Obviously there's a plethora of citations on people considering the west imperialist, but it's not exactly something you can measure, it's more of an ideological stance.

 

[OmCheeto]

I don't know. I honestly don't know. But it always gets me when people get so bloody worked up because it's about THEIR people. And it's not just in war. Recently, the somewhat arising xenophobia in Sweden has raised similar feelings within me - People get so damned worked up about what is WE, what is SWEDISH, and what is FOREIGN and EVIL.

Ha ha! Now you are quoting me!

Frankly, I think it's about time that everyone was sat down and had it hammered into their heads that we are all cousins, and all this us vs. you crap is, well, a load of crap. We are all we. As in us.

Versteh?

What I do know is that there is no real way to win a war, only various ways of losing it.

Umm... No.

Om: My opinions will certainly change with the years, as they always have. But I am quite certain that they will not move further toward the support of the ever imperialistic institutions in the West.

I think imperialism has become a worldwide phenomena over the last 100 years. Unfortunately, it has run head-on into the digital revolution of the last 20 years, along with an ever increasing population time bomb.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

I think imperialism has become a worldwide phenomena over the last 100 years. Unfortunately, it has run head-on into the digital revolution of the last 20 years, along with an ever increasing population time bomb.

Ah, yes, that is an interesting notion I have reflected over before. Digitalization will certainly go a long way in the promotion of... Well, let's call it freedom. And equality. The problem is getting it out there, you know?

 

[TubbaBlubba]

My friend, war can be won, and often is. Modern warfare is tempered by the inability of a populace to accept images of slaughter. To recall the issue of the Romans, they imposed a language, religion, and military conscription. They won, a LOT. I suggest you research the word "Decimate".

War can be won, and that empires rise and fall is part of history. It is a kind of madness to believe that war or violence can be "fair" or "ruled". I'm sorry, war should be short, and overwhelming, and if that is not an option, seek something other than war. If the USA wanted to conquer Iraq, we could, but it would require the death of many millions, and a level of brutality that is not deemed acceptable. I would add, that in that calculation, there is nothing we want so much in Iraq that we should kill so many.

War is meant to be the rapid conquest or defense of a region, not a police action. War is terrible, but sieges are true hell. War and conflict have been a part of humanity for as long as there are fossil records; what do you believe has changed that? If an empire falls a dozen generations after a war is won, for that people it's a win. That's life, and right or wrong enter into the decision to engage or not, but not the execution of violence.

I see what you mean. What I mean is that there's never a true justification for war. "Conquest" may be fine as far as a casus belli goes, but is it ever justified? To strike down despotic regimes? At the cost of how many civillians, forced and employed by that regime?

I'm not naíve enough to think that we will ever have a world without military powers, but I really hope we'll get over petty struggles of territory, or worse, culture. There will obviously be wars against terrorist groups and the like in the future, but I hope we will never see the like of the world wars again. I truly hope so.

 

[OmCheeto]

I hope until the last dollar.

I'm actually quiet surprised for good by the forum, never thought there are so many people abroad who understand our position.

And it's good to have you here. I've never had the chance to talk to an Israeli. Only Jews. We've a slew of them here in the states. Frankly, we get along so well here that I can't tell them apart from the Muslims and Christians.*

I have had the opportunity over the last 5 years to exchange barbs with people from Jordan on another science forum. It was supposedly just one person, but the grammar and attitude changed from one post to the other. I finally decided that it might be a classroom of students practicing their skills for an English language class.

I sensed that some of the students wanted to send out messages of discontent regarding their own country, but were hesitant to go fully ballistic.

I think this is something that some of our nations take for granted. A general lack of fear of reprisal for things we say about anything. Yesterday I saw that Egypt has 17,000 political prisoners. I can only imagine that if people from Iran, Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, etc, were to come out and voice their discontent over local conditions, they might disappear in the night.

So in this sense, I find silence from certain people, while not a sign of support for Israel, may signal a dissatisfaction with their own governments.

* I used to claim to be a Christian, Jew, and a Muslim, on the previously mentioned forum. Now I claim to be a Buddhistic follower of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. We're very prone to fads here in America.

 

[TubbaBlubba]

War is preferable than slavish peace.

That does NOT mean that all types of peace are slavish, but that we have no right to demand of others that they should become so squeamish of ever defending for themselves or their family.

That sort of paralyzation demand is, however, the pure evil lurking at the centre of absolute pacificm.

Hmmm... For once, I agree with you. I certainly don't want a future which is an economic slavery under the corporations, for one.

 

[Pattonias]

You know, I imagine that the discussions between our world leaders are about this convoluted.

 

[Office_Shredder]

I'm pretty convinced that the translators at those discussions make world policy up on the spot

 

[SW VandeCarr]

I'm not Jewish, but I understand there's a saying in Israel:

אם הערבים מנשקו, לא תהיה מלחמה.
אם יתפרק מנשקו ישראל, לא תהיה ישראל.

I'm not sure I got it right. I'll let someone else translate it. If no one does, I'll give my attempt.

 

[SW VandeCarr]

I am translating (roughly), not making a statement here, "If you take weapons from Arabs there will be no war. If you take weapons from Israel, there will be no Israel."

Yes. That's my understanding. Thanks

 

[tiny-tim]

I'm not Jewish, but I understand there's a saying in Israel:

אם הערבים מנשקו, לא תהיה מלחמה.
אם יתפרק מנשקו ישראל, לא תהיה ישראל.

I'm not sure I got it right. I'll let someone else translate it. If no one does, I'll give my attempt.

It means if the Arabs put down their weapons, there will be no war; if Israel puts down its weapons, there will be no Israel.

What's the point you're making? ​

 

[SW VandeCarr]

If he means that Arabs are completely at fault, I can think of better sayings to reference.

I was simply asking if I understood the saying properly. It probably better describes the state of affairs in the past (before the 1978 Camp David accords) than now. However, as you say, Hamas is still dedicated to the destruction of Israel and they are supported by Iran (which, however, is not an Arab state.).

 

[TubbaBlubba]

I heard a radio report today that IRAN is planning to send a convoy of two ships. With elite military on it, prepared to help with any means neccesary (at least that's how I interpret it).

This will not go down well, at all.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3900886,00.html First source I could dig up.

 

[Office_Shredder]

I heard a radio report today that IRAN is planning to send a convoy of two ships. With elite military on it, prepared to help with any means neccesary (at least that's how I interpret it).

This will not go down well, at all.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3900886,00.html First source I could dig up.

Do you think Israel just sinks the military escort?

 

[TubbaBlubba]

I have absolutely no idea how they will handle this situation, and I don't think it will go down well in any case.

 

[Pattonias]

I heard a radio report today that IRAN is planning to send a convoy of two ships. With elite military on it, prepared to help with any means neccesary (at least that's how I interpret it).

This will not go down well, at all.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3900886,00.html First source I could dig up.

Now if they try and run the blockade; that would be an act of war.