Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

American "Liberals" Are Dangerous Dimwits

newbie said:
we get fairly regular visits by racists &/or banned returners using (predictable) dogwhistles to try to disrupt our famously balanced debates and disrupt our polite understated British reserve.
Click to expand...

I entirely understand, trolls and blow-ins are a problem for any sensible board. As I mentioned before, I have known Pinkie-Flamingo for some years on another board, but I have never engaged her in discussion upon the subject of Israel. I have known many Jewish people and one was of great importance to me while I was growing up - so I have a very positive attitude to Jewish culture, but I am not a supporter of what I understand to be Zionism. I am not a devotee of nationalism in any of its forms.

I regard Pinkie-Flamingo as a firm on-line friend, and as an intelligent and cultured woman, so it is probably as well that we have not discussed the Israeli-Palestinian question - an uninformed opinion (which is all of which I am capable on this question,) is not worth airing at the expense of a valued friendship. In addition to which, peoples' life experiences form certain views which cannot always be understood by others of different experiences, and possibly, values.


newbie said:
IME there are differences in the understanding and appreciation of class in our two nations divided by common(ish) language. But like you I appreciate the discussions of others. What board did you come from, I'd like to have a look?
Click to expand...

The board concerned is called Political Hotwire, and the server is situated in the USA. I have posted on another board in the distant past, but I was much younger then, and being largely apolitical, I found the somewhat aggressive and inflexible American brand of conservatism a bit difficult to deal with. I find the membership at Political Hotwire to be more balanced, and the discourse there to be more civil. But of course there are the ubiquitous rants about 'liberals'. ;)

And BTW, I am not an American - my family home is in Kent, but I'm studying in Australia - I'm not quite sure why I joined an American board, but I think it was because my uncle took me on a world trip which included the US, where he was giving a talk. I was treated very kindly by the Americans we met, and I guess I was affected by the concept - not uncommon amongst 12 & 13 year olds - that everything American was 'wicked cool'. :cool:
 
Pinkie_Flamingo said:
The premise is that Israel has less right to do what is needed to protect its citizens than other nations have, because Israel's right to exist is not "as legitimate".
Click to expand...
What premise? Where does it come from? Who proposed it?

I have only asked that the Isreali state be required to uphold the same international principles of law any other state should adhere to; to refrain from humans rights abuses, like any other state should; to treat its citizens equally, as any state should be required to do.


(As indeed I require the UK state to do, and which I have criticised when it has not done. As was the case in Northern Ireland, for example).
 
Leo2 said:
I entirely understand, trolls and blow-ins are a problem for any sensible board. As I mentioned before, I have known Pinkie-Flamingo for some years on another board, but I have never engaged her in discussion upon the subject of Israel. I have known many Jewish people and one was of great importance to me while I was growing up - so I have a very positive attitude to Jewish culture, but I am not a supporter of what I understand to be Zionism. I am not a devotee of nationalism in any of its forms.

I regard Pinkie-Flamingo as a firm on-line friend, and as an intelligent and cultured woman, so it is probably as well that we have not discussed the Israeli-Palestinian question - an uninformed opinion (which is all of which I am capable on this question,) is not worth airing at the expense of a valued friendship. In addition to which, peoples' life experiences form certain views which cannot always be understood by others of different experiences, and possibly, values.




The board concerned is called Political Hotwire, and the server is situated in the USA. I have posted on another board in the distant past, but I was much younger then, and being largely apolitical, I found the somewhat aggressive and inflexible American brand of conservatism a bit difficult to deal with. I find the membership at Political Hotwire to be more balanced, and the discourse there to be more civil. But of course there are the ubiquitous rants about 'liberals'. ;)

And BTW, I am not an American - my family home is in Kent, but I'm studying in Australia - I'm not quite sure why I joined an American board, but I think it was because my uncle took me on a world trip which included the US, where he was giving a talk. I was treated very kindly by the Americans we met, and I guess I was affected by the concept - not uncommon amongst 12 & 13 year olds - that everything American was 'wicked cool'. :cool:
Click to expand...
cheers. I've started looking at political hotwire. So far so good, a few pages in and no-one has mentioned guns :)
 
newbie said:
cheers. I've started looking at political hotwire. So far so good, a few pages in and no-one has mentioned guns :)
Click to expand...

Great, I hope you like it enough to look in from time to time. I'm not being nationalistic, but we could do with a few more Brits over there, I think I'm one of two 'aliens' resident in the UK - and there's one ex-pat. :)
 
newbie said:
cheers. I've started looking at political hotwire. So far so good, a few pages in and no-one has mentioned guns :)
Click to expand...

Check out the thread which posits that the UK has surrendered to Sharia law and should just turn over your government to Arab terrorists.

"It is time for the UK to Surrender..."

American Reich wing members seem to lack respect for the UK' s military. Or anything else about your country.
 
Last edited:
danny la rouge said:
What premise? Where does it come from? Who proposed it?

I have only asked that the Isreali state be required to uphold the same international principles of law any other state should adhere to; to refrain from humans rights abuses, like any other state should; to treat its citizens equally, as any state should be required to do.


(As indeed I require the UK state to do, and which I have criticised when it has not done. As was the case in Northern Ireland, for example).
Click to expand...

Are both parties to the conflict to be held to this standard? If so, then obviously, the Arab terrorists are FAR more inhumane.

If not, why can we seriously suggest that Israel must follow rules of engagement, placing more lives at risk, but the terrorists need not do so?
 
Pinkie_Flamingo said:
Are there military actions available to Israel which would harm no Arab children? Is that ever an option when the terrorists hide behind children, in schools or hospitals?

How many Israeli Jewish children have been killed by Arab terrorists?
Click to expand...
If muslim terrorists had taken over a school in the USA, with (innocent) muslim students, would you think it appropriate that the military blew the whole school up?

This is an occupation and the Israeli government is responsible for all citizens.

The UN has ruled that so much of what Israel is doing is illegal. Time and time again.
 
Pinkie_Flamingo said:
Are both parties to the conflict to be held to this standard? If so, then obviously, the Arab terrorists are FAR more inhumane.

If not, why can we seriously suggest that Israel must follow rules of engagement, placing more lives at risk, but the terrorists need not do so?
Click to expand...
Please read my posts. Stop inventing straw man positions I haven't argued. It's incredibly tiresome.

And generally, do some homework.
 
Pinkie_Flamingo said:
Are both parties to the conflict to be held to this standard? If so, then obviously, the Arab terrorists are FAR more inhumane.

If not, why can we seriously suggest that Israel must follow rules of engagement, placing more lives at risk, but the terrorists need not do so?
Click to expand...
Do you not see how dangerous it is to take the attitude, "the other guys are the bad guys, therefore the rules don't apply to us"? This is precisely the justification that terrorists will use, and if you find yourself using it, you have to ask yourself, is what I am doing terrorism? If I am going to break the rules with such impunity can I complain if others do the same against me?
 
Pinkie_Flamingo said:
Check out the thread which posits that the UK has surrendered to Sharia law and should just turn over your government to Arab terrorists.

"It is time for the UK to Surrender..."

American Reich wing members seem to lack respect for the UK' s military. Or anything else about your country.
Click to expand...
yes I've seen that and various others, including your ones about Israel and Ireland and "Britain's Far Left Party Is Dying" and other gems. I find myself thinking there's 300,000,000 of you and the only people who make sense in your debates appear to be foreigners.
 
Spymaster said:
Oh my god, I missed that.

If that's really what she thinks then this thread may as well be binned.
Click to expand...

I am not alone in my views. Ambassador Halley just told the U.N. they must reform and lose the extreme anti-Israel bias, or the U.S. will not participate.

(I can't link atm, but it is reported in today's Telegraph. )

You don't view Arab terrorists who kill British or American citizens favorably, I presume.

So why is it different if they "only" kill Israeli Jews?

Edited to add:

US threatens to pull out of UN Human Rights Council
 
Last edited:
newbie said:
yes I've seen that and various others, including your ones about Israel and Ireland and "Britain's Far Left Party Is Dying" and other gems. I find myself thinking there's 300,000,000 of you and the only people who make sense in your debates appear to be foreigners.
Click to expand...

Well, that much is true. Even with better access to British newspapers, etc., it remains very hard to form a realistic view of events there without the help of actual British people.
 
Pinkie_Flamingo said:
It is a word that comes with an association with South Africa, where violent oppression of the black citizens cost so many lives and blighted almost everyone else's.
Click to expand...

Wow, you're sharp! The original word does have South African connotations! :facepalm:

Meanwhile, the word "apartheid" has been deployed to explain a certain type of oppression in other places than RSA for over half a century.

I notice this happens a lot, as to the ME. Pro-Arab people describe the restrictions on Israeli Arabs as creating a "prison camp". Loss of life during the 1948 is referred to as a "massacre" and so forth.

It happens in the U.S. as well. The BLM protests are referred to as "riots", when the last riot here was 1992, after the Rodney King verdicts, acquiting the officers who attacked him.

3 days of violence, more than 100 dead, over $3 billion in property damage.

Point is, this kind of hyperbole is dishonest and frustrates the meaningful exchange of ideas.
Click to expand...

No, that's the point that you're trying (and so far failing) to establish. Descriptive language describes. The words you're railing against - like any liberal would, amusingly - are broadly descriptive. You appear to be arguing that in cases that you disagree with, only words that are terminologically precise should be used in reportage instead. "No, no! Not 'riot'! It's 'racial anarchy with property damage and looting' !" when everybody knows what "riot" signifies, and reads that into the reportage accordingly.
 
Pinkie_Flamingo said:
Why are there separate buses? Because if not, Israeli Arabs kill Israeli Jews.

Then Arab terrorists pay the families of suicide bombers "tribute", from foreign aid received from the U.S.

It's not moral or human to demand that Israeli Jews volunteer to be murdered, without complaint.
Click to expand...

Your first sentence above is why your arguments have no credibility. You happily collectively smear an entire socio-ethnic group as Jew-killers, when the reality is that a tiny minority of Arabs within the state of Israel - even including the "Occupied Territories" are Jew-killers. Just as only a tiny minority of Jews within the state of Israel are Arab-killers.

You're intellectually-dishonest. No-one is asking "Israeli Jews" to "volunteer to be murdered". I'm only surprised you didn't add the word "again".
 
ViolentPanda said:
Your first sentence above is why your arguments have no credibility. You happily collectively smear an entire socio-ethnic group as Jew-killers, when the reality is that a tiny minority of Arabs within the state of Israel - even including the "Occupied Territories" are Jew-killers. Just as only a tiny minority of Jews within the state of Israel are Arab-killers.

You're intellectually-dishonest. No-one is asking "Israeli Jews" to "volunteer to be murdered". I'm only surprised you didn't add the word "again".
Click to expand...

BULLSHIT. Not for one minute do I think MOST Israeli Arabs want to kill Jews. I doubt many actual killers wanted to do so -- but they cannot provide for their families and the tribute offered by HAMAS, etc. becomes irresistible.

The fact is, Israelis cannot safely allow Arab children freedom of movement because the most violent among them will use the kids as suicide bombers. That certainly does not make the children responsible.

Children as Suicide Bombers in Islamic Countries

Occupied Territories: Stop Use of Children in Suicide Bombings

450 of 452 suicide attacks in 2015 were by Muslim extremists, study shows

The Israeli Arabs need what citizens of every Arab nation need -- human rights for all citizens, a growing middle class and moderate leadership. This is 8.5 million people, terrorized by a handful of uber-violent Arab men. Men who attach no value to lives of women and children in their own families. Depraved men.

NOT the "average Muslim".
 
Pinkie_Flamingo said:
BULLSHIT. Not for one minute do I think MOST Israeli Arabs want to kill Jews. I doubt many actual killers wanted to do so -- but they cannot provide for their families and the tribute offered by HAMAS, etc. becomes irresistible.
Click to expand...

Then write what you mean, not generalised bollocks.

As for what the killers wanted to do, I suggest you actually read any of the extensive literature on what motivates suicide attackers, rather than voicing your doubts from ignorance. As an easily digestible start, Robert A. Papes' "Dying to Win" is to be recommended.

The fact is, Israelis cannot safely allow Arab children freedom of movement because the most violent among them will use the kids as suicide bombers. That certainly does not make the children responsible.

Children as Suicide Bombers in Islamic Countries

Occupied Territories: Stop Use of Children in Suicide Bombings

450 of 452 suicide attacks in 2015 were by Muslim extremists, study shows
Click to expand...

Your argument that "Israelis cannot safely allow..." is fatuous. It's an argument that proceeds from the position of Israelis being the victims, and ignores why the Israelis might be victimised. Your entire argument relies on the collective punishment of "Israeli Arabs" (as you call them) in order to make Israeli Jews feel safe.


The Israeli Arabs need what citizens of every Arab nation need -- human rights for all citizens, a growing middle class and moderate leadership. This is 8.5 million people, terrorized by a handful of uber-violent Arab men. Men who attach no value to lives of women and children in their own families. Depraved men.

NOT the "average Muslim".
Click to expand...

What "Israeli Arabs" need is for the state of Israel to stop providing fuel for the "uber-violent Arab men" (stereotyping much?) to feed the flames of anger. Your partiality merely excuses anything the state of Israel does as reaction to stimuli. The reality is that the last 2 incursions into Gaza had no stimuli except the wish of the state of Israel to disrupt Gaza's infrastructure so that it is always scrambling to render basic services to the population. This is siege tactics 101. Even the idiots who were junior officers in my battalion understood that, and they were idiots.
 
ViolentPanda said:
Then write what you mean, not generalised bollocks.

As for what the killers wanted to do, I suggest you actually read any of the extensive literature on what motivates suicide attackers, rather than voicing your doubts from ignorance. As an easily digestible start, Robert A. Papes' "Dying to Win" is to be recommended.



Your argument that "Israelis cannot safely allow..." is fatuous. It's an argument that proceeds from the position of Israelis being the victims, and ignores why the Israelis might be victimised. Your entire argument relies on the collective punishment of "Israeli Arabs" (as you call them) in order to make Israeli Jews feel safe.




What "Israeli Arabs" need is for the state of Israel to stop providing fuel for the "uber-violent Arab men" (stereotyping much?) to feed the flames of anger. Your partiality merely excuses anything the state of Israel does as reaction to stimuli. The reality is that the last 2 incursions into Gaza had no stimuli except the wish of the state of Israel to disrupt Gaza's infrastructure so that it is always scrambling to render basic services to the population. This is siege tactics 101. Even the idiots who were junior officers in my battalion understood that, and they were idiots.
Click to expand...

There is nothing whatever Israel could do that would satisfy you.

And that is anti-semitism.
 
Pinkie_Flamingo said:
Fuck the UN; it is nothing but a mouthpiece for Arab extremists.

There is nothing illegitimate in the land Israel acquired since 1948, anymore than there is about the land the US acquired since 1776.
Click to expand...

Why not hold a referendum and ask all the people actually living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem whether they want to be ruled by Israel or the PA? That would surely confirm or deny 'legitimacy' wouldn't it?
 
Although I can admit to knowing very little (essentially close to nothing) about the Israeli conflict and "all the trouble in the Middle East", I feel I can not make any comments regarding the issues brought up in this thread. They are a few of the political problems that I do not follow, as it is "over my head" because there are other things I choose to care about (I'm not saying it's a problem to be close minded about, I just put my efforts into other situations).

That being said, I feel I can make a comment regarding the title of the thread.

My personal belief lately, has been that the Americans that put all their ducks in a row for the Cheeto-In-Chief, are the real "dangerous dimwits". Those puppets who label themselves tried and true deplorables (after that word got laughed at, there is a big group that labels themselves as such now)... the supporters who have gone and put pure prejudice and racism back into this country... all because their fearless leader is a egotistical cunt that wants to make the USA an all enclosed negative bomb waiting to explode. I've seen so many people protesting how The Wig is right in all that he does, and how America is going to become great again. This man is going to put the country on the map for being amazing (amazingly backwards, IMO).

Yes, there have been problems in the past, but the more I watch on the news these days (relating to the current leader), the more I find that this country is hurdling itself into a possible war that it can not win. Other countries that have threatened the US and the thoughts of an imminent "WWIII" scenario is nothing compared to what I hope would not happen, should the businessman stay in office.

I work with staunch Republican supporters and I've previously worked with them. Where I live in this crazy country, it's a very redneck / hillbilly area. They call themselves "Crackers" and put their whole heart into the "rebel flag" as well as being behind the new man living in the White House. They will not give up until every last promise is fulfilled. The sheep have their feet on the ground and are ready to fight at moments notice.

That's the scary part!

/rant (opinion) over. Nothing else to see here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

danny la rouge
What are the underlying causes of hate crime?
2
Replies
53
Views
1K
pug
pug
zedr
French Revolutionary Calendar - what are you?
2
Replies
33
Views
888
Fozzie Bear
Fozzie Bear
frogwoman
What are the international implications if Israel gets kicked out of the UN?
2
Replies
35
Views
865
tim
tim
Protag
John Mearsheimer on Liberal Hegemony
2
Replies
30
Views
1K
Protag
Protag
brixtonscot
Sexual Liberation and/or Capitalist Assimilation ?
2
Replies
39
Views
2K
yield
Y
Back
Top Bottom