Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (7459)	3/3/2004 5:07:27 AM
From: E. T.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

"I have not said Arab citizens of Israel are being oppressed. I said Palestinians in the Palestinian territories currently being occupied by Israel are being oppressed." Terrorism is what oppresses the Palestinians. That is the goal of terrorism, to create an intolerable situation so the people will rise up. The PA's living conditions are a direct result of its leaders use of terror. It wasn't like this in the 70 or early 80s, hundreds of thousands of Palestinians casually took buses and walked over to the Israeli side for work everyday. Terrorism has put an end to that and that is what Arafat and his cronies were after.

To: zonder who wrote (7459)	3/3/2004 8:28:59 AM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Drawing parallels and similarities between two things is clearly an attempt equate the two things. It seems disingenious to deny this. If the intention is not to equate the two things, then what is the purpose of drawing the parallel? To move just a little further away from Palestine Let's not. That is the subject, and we are not done talking about it. there are Kurds and Greeks currently being oppressed by Turkey Pray tell how (1) the Kurds and (2) the Greeks are currently being oppressed by Turkey. "Let's not" and "pray tell" are conflicting messages. Light may be shed about application of a principle to one case by applying the principle to another it seems to me. So - I don't need to google anything to know that the several hundred thousand Greek refugees created when Turkey invaded Cyprus 3 decades ago have not returned to their former homes. While they have likely been resettled (the humane thing to do) the property they owned is clearly being denied them. Now there is a very clear parallel here with the dispossession of the Palestinians. The continued occupation of much of Cyprus and the settling of mainland Turks in Cyprus are more parallels with the Israeli - Palestinian situation. Now then, if (a) the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and (b) the Greek-Turk conflict on Cyprus have very clear parallels and similarities (and it is obvious that they do), and if it is appropriate that (a) should be considered to be a parallel to (c) Nazi Germany, then clearly (b) should be considered a parallel to (c) as well. ..appropriate to compare Turkey and Nazi Germany as parallel situations. There was a time when the parallels were demonstrated, yes. Not recently, and definitely not "currently", though. I would disagree with the drawing of such a parallel even in the past. I don't see that the Turkish government ever had genocide as a goal in Cyprus or that the Turkish government was motivated by a racial idealogy. Indeed, an argument could be made they were acting in defense of the rights of ethnic Turkish citizens of Cyprus at the time of the invasion. I would view an attempt to claim that Turkish actions in Cyprus were parallels to Nazi Germany's actions in the '30's and '40's is merely an attempt to employ inflammatory propaganda. the very same anti-semitic material being fed to the masses And so what if there is? Does that justify Israeli army occupying Palestinians' land and killing them one by one, denying them access to their jobs, schools, and hospitals, at times dropping bombs from the sky??? If you ask whether the Israelis actions are justified by the campaign of terror the Palestinians are mounting against them, the answer is not so clear. First, occupation - it is in everyone's interest that end in some manner. But it should end in a way which does not lead to the non-occupied land being used as a base for mounting new attacks on Israel - which was the case with the PA. The PA came into being as part of a process intended to lead to an ending of the occupation and granting independence to the Palestinians. Instead it rapidly became a base for terrorism and the process was leading not to peace but to creating a new Lebanon situation. Or, alternatively, you know exactly what I am saying, but instead of confronting the issue itself, are creating nonexistent issues to attack. I believe that is a logical fallacy called "straw man". Or I think you're mistaken and am trying to explain why.