HarryG

Generally I find it really offensive when people I have been debating start slandering me in a post to someone else.

You say >> “Disagree with me if you must, but please don’t misrepresent me.

So what you mean when you say >>> “ What will the present Israeli action spawn? As China rises, the US wonders why it loses respect” Because it is beyond me.

You say >> “ Paul L had asked … the implication being that I don’t condemn the firing of rockets by Hamas.”

You sound like Dagget. Please don’t imagine what I am implying. You’re flat out wrong. I rarely imply anything in these posts as I’m trying to make a deliberate point. Very few of the people I argue with a capable of anything as nuanced as an implication and you’ve showed us again how true that is.

The point in raising the above quote was to point out that your emotional language describing the suffering of the Palestinians can equally be applied to the Israelis. Israelis are also ripped apart by rockets, suicide bombers etc. The suffering is not one sided.

You say >> “There is clear evidence that the settlers will not move from their homes, though they have been built illegally.

How do you think the settlers left Gaza? You think they all went peacefully? You clearly don’t know what you are talking about. Read something and educate yourself. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4159958.stm

You say >> A man walks into a bus station with explosives attached to his body, and then detonates, killing himself and nine others. Another man sits in his armoured vehicle, fires a mortar into a bus station and kills ten people. Both these acts are acts of terrorism”

Let me put it to you this way. Israeli tank is under fire from Hamas launched anti-tank missiles. It fires back and instead of hitting the gunmen, kills ten civilians. If that to you is the same thing as walking into a bus station and exploding a bomb, then it’s probably a good thing you don’t want to continue our chat

Bushbred,

You are like a never ending record.

One question. How has Israels nukes got anything to do with this conflict, or the last, or the one before that?

You don't need Kant or Kissinger or the social science dept of your favourite university to explain that one simple question.

Matangi,

I wouldn't bother with OUG. He's speaking in tongues or some such. Maybe the resident born agains could identify what BIZARRE phrophecies have been revealed to him.

Young Steve,

As intelligent and thoughful a man as I believe Obama to be, he's going to be a lame duck president. The number of problems he's going to have to deal with beggar belief.

Some might pretend that these are of Bush's making. On the contrary, Obama will be tested by every despot going, in the hope that he will be a bleeding heart liberal, unwilling to use force even if it was needed, for fear of looking too much like Bush.

The Israelis are going to be the very least of his problems. Looks and more like the Israelis will have "won" by then anyway. Sad that it cost so many innocent lives for the enemies of Israel to learn that Israel will not be beaten militarily.

For a very well reasoned, and moderate analysis of the current tradgedy in the Middle East, see Daniel Finkelsteins article in the weekend australian Opinion section.http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,24892394-15084,00.html

matangu quote>>..I only joint [?]..this forum last week so stop your sorry arse assumption and stupidity...You assumed to know me when you don't know crap about me.>>

sunshine i was responding to the WeiRd n@meD occasional posting dUde

that was his posting histry NOT YOURS..,you nutter[yet your response is revealing ,and yes i dont know crap about you [nor give a damm]

you reveal more about you than me with absurdities like

<<..Only you,nut head,that failed to see the reality of the issue>>

mate your crafted reality is the delusional one,..more quotes

<<..outrage and condemnation against Israel only to be found later that the photos were doctored or altered through Photoshop elements to make the scene in Lebanon extremely terrible...Same things occurred here recently...Photos circulated are mostly doctored.>>

mate the media isnt allowed in[yet everyday we see some media from israel[usually a group of reporters being fed lies

[and then some panicked media liason dude,shepparding the media to safty to make todays 'news' report..when questions get out of hand[much like the embedded media in iraq 'war']

can you imagine the horror hushed up in that fake bombardment warning or the deliberated perverted bombing back to the stone age of gazaians ,iraq's bombing killed over one 1,000,000, iraquis sans media scruteny [just like israel is doing here]with the same bombs

800 reported dead..[but who has searched the bombed buildings?[recall from earth quakes]

how many are hiden under unsearched buildings[the truth is far worse than israel allows to be reported..[not that reporters will be allowed in before the real figure is raised to near 1,000,000 [ie the remaining palistein's are quietly exterminated]

issue-ing were going to kill you statements is revealed for what it is [those who flee ,are herded into buildings and bombed anyhow, and those killed in their hovels [well its their own fault right?]

your defending wholesale colluded murder

your just filled with too much fear and hate to know it

Bushbred
Bit hard blaming the UN. Initial voting indication was that UN would not agree to the partition of Palestine, but a few fairly well placed bribes (oops, did I say that?) from the USA was the decider. Britain was only too happy to get out of Palestine, (she was broke) and Ben Gurian, later the PM of Israel, was pioneering the concept of setting off bombs to encourage the Brits to get out. If you want to blame someone, go back to Britain’s Balfour Declaration and the apparent double crossing of the Arabs who had been cooperating with Major TE Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia). Or you can blame Richard Coeur de Lion and his fellow Christian crusaders, or whoever that fool god was who told the Jews they were the “chosen people” and Israel was their “promised land”. Best not to blame anybody if we are trying to resolve the issue. Finding someone to blame is for the historians, not today’s conciliators. I think the creation of Israel was the “right” thing to do; it’s just that the Palestinian state was never formed, and it would have needed a lot of assistance to modernise. But the world was pretty well broke at the time, after WWII, and only the US had money. Incidentally, Secretary of State Marshall (he of the Marshall Plan) advised Truman against the partition.
Matangi
You are a problem. There is responsibility to be honest and respectful. Your use of the straw man argument shows you to be either quite dishonest or unable to follow another person’s argument. Perhaps I have not been as clear as I thought I was, but I won’t repeat my position for you, in the hope you might read it more carefully the second time. For your information, to "set up a straw man," one describes a position that superficially resembles an opponent's actual view, yet is easier to refute. Enough said on your irrelevant comments.
tbc

..cont'd
When I continued reading your contribution, I concluded that you're a comedian, and here I was, taking you seriously. In your ill-mannered tirade again UOG you say: “you need to write in proper English cos you make ……… ever since I joint.” It is the spelling of “cos” and “joint” (misspelled again later, proving it was deliberate) while berating your target for his inability “to write proper English” that shows you have a great sense of humour and irony, or, perhaps you are a joke, and not the joker. (Respect is not always easy.)

While I have words to spare, the aborigines (and I am proud to carry aboriginal blood in my veins), though downtrodden since 1788 did not generally resort to violence as you are hypothesising, but won land rights through the High Court. Since 1967 the strongest (militarily and financially) group in Australia has been making concessions to the aborigines in a long term attempt to ameliorate the bitterness of the “invasion”. A good model for Israel to consider, during a period of peace?

PaulL … if I mention you in a post without directly addressing you, you can still read it. Each post does not have to be specifically addressed to an individual. I thought our exchanges had outlasted their useful life. We have different attitudes, and will continue to justify those attitudes though we may modify them over time, in the light of experience and maturity. I am seeking a peaceful reconciliation in the Middle East and believe we should continue to strive for peaceful solutions, not only there but also in other trouble spots. I try to adopt an even-handed approach, though I do believe that Israel as the stronger protagonist should take the lead and make the initial and probably bigger concessions. You endorse (by your direct words, and by IMPLICATION) Israel’s current bombardment. We disagree. I don’t think further exchanges between us are useful. But I will respond if I feel obliged, or I think I make a contribution. Atleast weagree that OUG speaks in tongues. My best wishes to you.

Harry G. I won't apologize for the way I contribute because I believe what I said in my previous writings. It is rather sad to see people who seemed very articulate in their writings, like you, approached politics and war in a very strange way. You expected Israel to just watch their own people dying, and to wait for more missiles, which is very scary way of thinking! A few things I see in your posting; you are either extremely liberal, which is not a strange thing, or you are just too perfect for this world of imperfection. If that is the case, then I am sorry I stepped on your toes.
I have my own way of writing that includes the use a few slang, example, my preference of "cos" over because and the word "joint", but if you take a closer look at OUG's writing, they just don't make sense; organization? nil! substance? nil. We can't seem to sense of his/her tirade. I maybe rude, but just read the way he analyzed my own contributions.
G, If there is any joke worth moving the muscles of my jaws, it is your argument that Israel should restrain and negotiate. Even if anti-Hamas contributors pointed out the fact that 2300 missiles were fired on Israel in a course of 6 months, excluding the amount of missiles fired before Israel moved out of Gaza. That is a joke to me! so who is the joke here? the answer is clear.
Iam glad to know you have some native Aussy in you, but the situation between the Aussy and the indigenous people is no way near the Israel and Hamas issue. In your case, the Australian government is able to negotiate peace with the indigenous people because they (Abos) aren't terrorizing Australian cities like the Hamas. If your people attacked Australian major cities with missiles everyday, what would the Aussy government do? Negotiate? You failed to answer my question.