|
Post by hibernicus on Dec 29, 2008 12:10:36 GMT
For some time we have been having a discussion on catholicism and anti-semitism in the Catholic forum. I now propse to start a thread specifically on Israel-Palestine, and invite our non-Catholic posters to contibute. Let me set out my stall (a) I believe the Christian (and especially the Catholic) thread of anti-semitism to be outrageous - we can debate what exactly constitutes anti-semitism, if anyoe wishes. It certainly contributed to the Holocaust and similar horros. (b) I think the creation of the State of Israel constituted an injustice to the Palestinians, and that it ought not to have taken place. However, since it has taken place (partly through the forced resettlement of Jews from arabic states) it should not be destroyed. (c) It should also be borne in mind that a major impetus behind the creation of Israel was the refusal of most states (including our own) to take in Jewish refugees from the Nazis, and the widespread view that even citizen Jews were somehow alien and could never really be authentic members of the nations where they lived. (d) I believe in a two-state solution involving the cession of the occupied territories to a Palestinian state and the removal of most of the settlements created therein since 1967. At the same time, I appreciate that this does pose significant risks to Israel - as does the continuation of the status quo. Let's discuss ths further
|
|
|
Post by Harris on Jan 7, 2009 14:15:41 GMT
Happy new year to all! My thoughts are firmly with the peoples involved in the current conflict in the Gaza region at this time.
Just an observation I have made on this subject. This morning on my way to work I was listening to Newstalk. There were the usual reports and updates about the regretful situation in Gaza City.
However, one texter to the show stated that as Hamas are the legally elected representatives of the people and form the majority of the government, that their actions by allowing their militants to fire rockets into Israel was in effect "an act of war" and that Israel had the right to respond to these actions.
He also went on to state that the Jewish point of view that they were promised this land by God was arrogant and baseless in any historical context outside the bible.
He made the comparison of Prussia and how we would react if militants wanted to bomb parts of Poland today to set up a state that hasn’t existed since 1918. He pointed out that Israel was set up 1948 when it had previously not existed since 2nd millennium BC.
My personal feelings on these issues are mixed. I feel terrible about the Palestinian situation and feel they have been treated extremely badly and unfairly by the International community since the foundation of the state of Israel.
However, I cannot condone the rocket launches into their territory by Hamas.
The state of Israel is now in place whether we agree with the way it was initially set up or not. A solution has to be found. I just hope that eventually it will be found without the use of violence.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 8, 2009 0:09:48 GMT
The statement that Israel is based on the view that the Jews were promised the land by God is a bit oversimplified. This is true of a section of Orthodox Jews who see the creation of Israel as a precursor to the coming of the Messiah (not all Orthodox take this view, and some even oppose Zionism on the grounds that a Jewish state should not be created until the Messiah comes) but Zionism was a predominantly secular movement based on the view that Jews were a nation like other nations, that they should have their own nation-state and that given the historic connection between Israel-Palestine and Judaism it could only be there. (There were one or two suggestions that it might be somewhere else. Some early Zionists favoured mass settlement in Uganda, and Stalin set up a supposed Jewish homeland in Siberia; had he not died when he did he would have deported Soviet Jews to it en masse.) Most leading Israeli politicians are not strictly observant (this is true of the nationalist Right as well as Labour and the other left parties. I tend to be pro-Israeli because of the history of Western anti-semitism (the recurrence of traditional anti-semitic imagery among some leftist anti-Zionists is really startling if you're aware of how such imagery was used in the past) and because of the cataclysmic results were Israel to be destroyed, but I sometimes fear that it is doomed - that it can only preserve itself by measures which corrupt it morally (and me as its supporter along with it) and which are doomed to fail in the long run. I hope for a two-state solution, but I think Israeli settlement policies have made it progressively harder for it to work and I don't think there is a Palestinian leadership capable of delivering a settlement. Gazans live in some of the worst conditions on earth; not surprising this has produced a death cult like Hamas which makes those conditions still worse.
|
|
|
Post by Harris on Jan 8, 2009 9:54:24 GMT
I know there is little use harping on about it now as the state of Israel has been in place for some time. But it seems so unjust that hundreds of Palestinians actually hold title deeds to homes in the settled areas that are now occupied by Jewish settlers.
This issue has never been addressed in the correct manner.
As modern Zionism has its roots as a reaction to anti-Semitism across Europe, it by consequence has always had hard line affiliates who view giving an inch as a sign of weakness that may lead to the Jews enduring further mistreatment. The British were attacked in Palestine by Zionist groups because of their restrictions on Jewish immigration and eventually Britain were forced to refer "Palestine" issue to the United Nations.
Because a significant number of the Israeli population subscribe to the Nationalist Zionism and Religious Zionism view (and you cant really blame them given the history of the Jewish people) they can (and do) sway Israeli government polices significantly.
Parties such as the National Religious Party have been at the forefront of Jewish settlement in the West Bank. The Religious Zionist movements have usually been associated with Modern Orthodox Jews. In the twenties the growing secularization of the Zionist movement led to opposition from some Orthodox Jewish groups, however in recent times more traditional Ultra-Orthodox Jews have been supporting this view of Zionism in the Government.
When the population of the country vote for extremes in the political spectrum (far left/far right etc), it usually leads to uncompromising policies where ner the twain shall meet.
The Iranian and Hamas view, however, that Israel should be wiped off the map is unacceptable in my view. As you state, there needs to be a solution that includes both peoples and Palestinians that have had their land confiscated should be compensated. Likewise Jewish settlers in the occupied territories who have no legal right to be there should be removed.
Unfortunately, removing these settlers get the extremists on the Israeli side all stirred up to the point where they can paralyze government policies. It’s a catch 22 situation.
There is also the issue of Christian Zionism. Evangelical Christians around the world (and significantly in the USA believe that Jesus cannot return to fight the final battle with Satan unless certain biblical prophecies in the Book of Revelation are fulfilled.
They believe that the State of Israel (or Gods chosen people) must be in place in the Holy Land for Biblical prophecy to be fulfilled.
Many powerful people in history have supported this view such as Pat Robertson (cringe, I dislike this man intensely), Ex-British Prime Ministers David Lloyd George and Arthur Balfour and former American President Woodrow Wilson. The influence of these people historically cannot be dismissed.
|
|
|
Post by hibernicus on Jan 9, 2009 15:46:30 GMT
Robertson is certainly a nasty piece of work; his belief in his personal prophetic inspiration essentially means that he treats whatever comes into his mind as the word of God, and some of his business dealings have been very questionable. Lloyd George and Wilson were not believers in Christian Zionism in the sort of sense you find in among premillenial dispensationalists (a reading of Scripture popularised by the nineteenth-century Irish Evengelical John Nelson Darby, BTW). I think they were moved by a more general sense of identification with the Old Testament Jews which is very commopn among Protestant biblicists, and in Lloyd George's case perhaps also by a sense that the Jews like the Welsh were a small people who deserved their place in the sun. Balfour was a High Anglican but of a very sceptical type; I think his prime motivation was that a Jewish state/colony in the Middle East could be used to defend British imperial interests there.
|
|
|
Post by Hemingway on Jan 14, 2009 16:55:29 GMT
Yeay! Something we can all agree on...... Pat Robertson is a nasty piece of work!
I feel so strongly for the people suffering right now in Gaza City and the surrounding countryside. I have empathy with the Israeli people but what is happening at the moment is way over the top in my opinion and the Israeli army are only carrying out the whims of their leaders at a time when a general election is just around the corner.
I do hope that the innocents amongst the dead in Gaza have not lost their lives for the political ambitions of some ageing men in Tel Aviv.
My thoughts are with the innocent people in Gaza at this time.
|
|
|
Post by Hemingway on Jan 16, 2009 9:12:51 GMT
In 20 days 1105 Palestinians killed by Israel including 346 children & 105 women, 5150 injured.
|
|
|
Post by Oliver, on Jun 14, 2015 10:55:27 GMT
Never expressed my thoughts on Israel-Palestine so grateful for the chance here. Don't know a lot about it but generally agree with Hibernicus's points in the first post but from them-and with his later points- I don't come to the same outcome of being "Pro-Israeli".
The Israeli nation from appearance have some measure of effective self-government, and the benefits there of: economic, education, sense of empowerment to people's lives. They also have an ally in the superpower the USA, and so probably then in some measure from other Western powers. They have made settlements within the borders of the Palestinian state, there are no Palestinian settlements encroaching in Israeli borders. In contrast the Palestinians have an ineffective state and no major powers as allies. From these facts Israel obviously has the characteristics of an imperialist state.
Note imperialism often uses "self-defence" as reasons for it. It is also noted that the Israeli people have an effective state and are noted for their intense nationalism. Nationalism in a people who have an effective state is ideologically aligned and tends towards imperialism.
Noting the behaviours and attitudes of the Israeli army one again sees imperialistic traits. (Note extreme supremacist statements can found in the writings and speeches of official army rabbis)
Noting the death toll and injuries between Israelis and Palestinians one sees a disproportion. The anguish of the Palestinians to the world has the appearance of being of an immense degree.
Palestinian military forces and government and culture in Palestine have all the characteristics of a people who experience great anguish in the face of an imperialistic power. So too the military tactics.
Palestine is neighboured in the region by Arab states. Arabs are in way brothers to Palestinians. With a common religion there is an increase emotion there compared to say between France and England in their region. The neighbouring Arab states being made up of "brothers" of the Palestinians, and sensing the Imperialism and so injustice are angry. However Arabic culture does have very strong anti-Semitic aspects, thus feeding their anger. And nationalism is an ideology noted in other Arab states.
Israel being an imperialistic state fuelled by an intense nationalism fail and have no interest in a peace process.
A conscious revision of nationalism, aware of the imperialistic traits inherent in nationalism in nation states, would have to take place in Israel, resulting in new government structures and a new foreign policy. Such a foreign policy would mean the encouragement towards self-government in Palestine and the Arab world, amongst other actions.
Such a conscious assessment of Israeli nationalism is very unlikely to happen. Resulting in the continued state of affairs or which I think, an ever increasing imperialistic influence directly, and through the ally of Superpower, into Palestine and neighbouring Arab states. There will probably be further settlements.
The Arab states will never have an effective weapon of mass destruction, such a myth is useful for imperialistic foreign policy hiding behind pre-emptive strikes in the cause of self-defence.
The image of terrorist activities to the world, which are only natural to occur in the situation of Palestine, help Israeli's righteousness and have their advantages to Israel. Meaning Israel do have an interest in Hamas and other groups for propaganda purposes.
Europe and the world will remain motionless whilst all this is going on.
I think its very hard to be what is called "Pro-Israeli". I think individuals and communities -not through nationalist nation states- should get involved with advancing the cause of self-governance in Palestine and Israel the Arab world, and their own countries. Note self-government implies not democracy only but local government, reasonably at all levels. Together with the highlighting of the implicit imperialism in modern nationalism, through humanitarian efforts, in Israel and other countries, I think would help.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2015 13:02:36 GMT
Oliver,
Your excuses for Israelis being imperialists are silly. So because Israel has invested time and effort in to building a successful country, while the people of Gaza seem more interested in provoking Israel and playing the victim afterwards, that makes them (Israel) imperialists? In regards to settlements, yes Israel has a tendency to annex land for its troubles after it has already been attacked. I believe they did this in the Arab-Israeli conflicts too.
You talk about Israelis being nationalistic - is there something wrong with this? - yet you seem to want us to believe that the people of Gaza are just sitting on their hands minding their own business?
Then you focus on these supposed extreme rabbis in the Israeli army, yet seem to be oblivious to the vast amounts of extremists in Gaza who are not just clerics?
Your reasoning that because Gaza has suffered more casualties that it must be the victim is shamefully dishonest. Statistics are useless unless you can say why they are the way they are. Have you considered it is because Israel actually bothers to defend its citizens, where as people in Gaza are happy to let their's die and then shed crocodile tears talking about how they died martyrs?
The government and military of Gaza show no signs of people in anguish. They show characteristics of blood thirsty savages who are constantly asking for war, but then because docile little pets when the media decide to show up. Also, if your misery is brought on by your own stupidity, don't blame anyone but yourself.
You know the people of Gaza are descended from people from different countries, yes? Of course the neighbouring Arabs are annoyed. I'll mention the Israeli-Arab conflict again. Yet these countries will not send aid to or help their "brothers" - at least not to the extent Israel does - because it is convenient to use their "brothers" as negative publicity for Israel in the West.
Saying Israel have no interest in peace is the biggest farce yet. They have constantly come to the table with terms, while Gaza has been quick to storm away in a huff if all its demands weren't met. If Gaza is interested in peace, why were they shelling Israel months before the media took interest in Israel's eventual retaliation? Even on Sky News, seconds in to a cease fire, a reporter in Gaza was caught off guard as a rocket was fired from behind her.
Saying that just because someone has pride in their country, they will become a warmongering imperialist is nonsense.
If Arab states stop provoking Israel, Israel will have no excuse to attack, and the US would not be able to show solidarity with Israel in any way. Israel is not the problem here, it's the anti-Semitic beliefs held by their neighbours.
Israel has never justified its conflicts with an excuse about a WMD, but if you think that no Arab state could ever get one then that is extremely naive.
You make a funny point. You say Israel is using terrorism as an excuse to wage war on Gaza, yet in the same breath you actually admit that there are terrorists in Gaza. Also, the fact that you consider these terrorist activities justified ("which are only natural to occur in the situation of Palestine"?) is sickening, and hypocritical.
Why shouldn't Europe remain neutral? Why should we run to the aid of fools are continuously bring their own misery on themselves?
Finally: Gaza has had ample opportunity to practice self-governance; and they used it to support anti-Israeli groups, resulting in the current situation. Given that Hamas and their ilk run Gaza with an Iron fist, I don't think democracy is looking like a viable option. If you think Israel doesn't given aid to people in Gaza, you should check again. It also gives people warnings about what areas are about to be attacked. Amazing, considering some people in Gaza are more than happy to use their own children as rocket fodder, or as cheap expendable labout that can be worked to death digging tunnels under Israel.
End
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Jun 14, 2015 13:24:48 GMT
I am broadly with Antaine on this one, though I would make a distinction between the people of Gaza and their government (and the West Bank as well; when was the last time anybody heard of an attack there? Israel and Fatah have good relations, I believe, so the former aren't simply anti-Arab). I would also say that though Israel has definitely been provoked by Hamas (whom I have no time for whatsoever), it has certainly over-reacted on occasion thus needlessly inflaming the situation and emboldening Hamas. The imperialism analogy does have some merit; the problem with Oliver's use of it is that he doesn't appear to realise that this applies equally to Israel's Arab neighbours, many of whom want that state wiped off the face of the earth. There is a problem on both sides of this where people ceaselessly highlight the aggression of their enemies yet want us to ignore the aggression of their own side. This isn't limited to quasi-military conflicts: the pro-aborts and more recently the Yes campaign in the pseudogamy referendum are a case in point. Similarly, both sides in the Arab-Israeli conflict have committed atrocities, but IMHO Hamas (as opposed to the people of Gaza in general) is the more guilty party in the manner that Antaine describes, which is why I agree with him more.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Jun 14, 2015 14:08:34 GMT
I also am broadly with Antaine, even if I would not have put it so stridently....and would not be so well-informed on the subject.
|
|
|
Post by Oliver on Jun 14, 2015 15:04:59 GMT
Appreciate your reply very much. As I said "don't know a lot about it", "never discussed with anyone", and hearing your points, I am very thankful.
I'm wondering (conscious of anti-Semitism at the same time) how did I come up with what I thought?
Perhaps its in the portrayal in the media? Or some personal projection of Ireland v Britain?
As I said I "don't know a lot about it" which is an understatement.
With regard to "You say Israel is using terrorism as an excuse to wage war on Gaza, yet in the same breath you actually admit that there are terrorists in Gaza. Also, the fact that you consider these terrorist activities justified ("which are only natural to occur in the situation of Palestine"?) is sickening, and hypocritical",
you made it in reference to,
"The image of terrorist activities to the world, which are only natural to occur in the situation of Palestine, help Israeli's righteousness and have their advantages to Israel. Meaning Israel do have an interest in Hamas and other groups for propaganda purposes"
....I didn't mean what you implied, I'm sorry I'm not very good at expressing what I'm thinking. What I meant was what I read somewhere on a reflection that in situations of great anguish like in Palestine and other places around the world and in history, where the people are experiencing anguish and military "inequality" compared to their "foe"; terrorist attacks and inhuman paramilitary violence rise. This is a part of human history and the present. I read the point and thought it represented something true. This is what I meant as "natural" and only that. The terrorism is not right. It occurs though, its a phenomena to be understood. If using this point, such terrorism is understandable, for all human nature is understandable which is not the same as saying it is right. In history a nation can ignore this and can present the terrorists with the characteristics of "blood thirsty savages" as you said and take some advantage out of this portrayal. I am sorry. As I said, "I don't know a lot about it", which is an understatement. Hamas are probably a minority cult very unrepresentative of the Palestinian people but something is telling me they're not because I don't see the obvious denouncing of them by Palestinians, in the public arena in the West which would occur. I'm not seeing it right. I have little knowledge of it all.
With regard to "Saying that just because someone has pride in their country, they will become a warmongering imperialist is nonsense",
I didn't say that. There is a school of thought that modern nationalism is an ideology which in its mechanics and psychology is unavoidably imperialistic. I am sorry for presenting this as fact, I should have stated that it was a school of thought. But if true, "is there something wrong with this", there would be. I am not critical of people having "pride in their country", in fact its something I esteem and so encourage, patriotism though is very different to nationalism.
Regarding the view of Israel I presented in the last post, I think its worthwhile to examine how people come up with this view. It is a view that people do come to out of the mish-mash one gets from the media, and so is an understandable view even though perversely wrong.
I think the fact that it is understandable means that we could try and highlight how this view is being forged.
Just to say, I admire the Israeli nation on so many levels. Their innovation, their deep patriotism, their wonderful initiatives in the founding of the State and those up to its present, the historic beauty of the Jewish people returning home, their incredible revival of Hebrew, I could go on. The Israeli nation, and the Jewish people as a whole, I really admire and I wish I had more relationship with them in the course of my life. When I have met Israelis, I have found Israelis as being distinctly warm hearted which reminded me of what I find in my sense of Irish-ness, a familial warm heartedness.
All this is not though incompatible with a state who uses inhuman military tactics just as a demonised Hamas are made up of members who love their families and who probably have great hospitality.
With the mish mash presented to me, am I evil for coming up with the view I had. Maybe stupid?
But you know there's something niggling me that if people can't present the negative view on Israel which they may have formed, in a form of discussion to test it, without being thought of as stupid or evil, then all this will just come out as anti-semitism somewhere won't it.
In my whole life I've never had a discussion on Israel and Palestine with someone this is the first time.
After my postings here and comments received I think it will be a long time before I ever will again.
Only joking. Thank you sincerely for your post and apologies if I have offended anyone, especially those who have been affected by the conflict.
Thanks
Read more: irishcatholics.proboards.com/thread/336/israel-palestine#ixzz3d2fzi9vk
|
|
|
Post by Young Ireland on Jun 14, 2015 15:21:20 GMT
Appreciate your reply very much. As I said "don't know a lot about it", "never discussed with anyone", and hearing your points, I am very thankful.
I'm wondering (conscious of anti-Semitism at the same time) how did I come up with what I thought?
Perhaps its in the portrayal in the media? Or some personal projection of Ireland v Britain?
As I said I "don't know a lot about it" which is an understatement.
With regard to "You say Israel is using terrorism as an excuse to wage war on Gaza, yet in the same breath you actually admit that there are terrorists in Gaza. Also, the fact that you consider these terrorist activities justified ("which are only natural to occur in the situation of Palestine"?) is sickening, and hypocritical",
you made it in reference to,
"The image of terrorist activities to the world, which are only natural to occur in the situation of Palestine, help Israeli's righteousness and have their advantages to Israel. Meaning Israel do have an interest in Hamas and other groups for propaganda purposes"
....I didn't mean what you implied, I'm sorry I'm not very good at expressing what I'm thinking. What I meant was what I read somewhere on a reflection that in situations of great anguish like in Palestine and other places around the world and in history, where the people are experiencing anguish and military "inequality" compared to their "foe"; terrorist attacks and inhuman paramilitary violence rise. This is a part of human history and the present. I read the point and thought it represented something true. This is what I meant as "natural" and only that. The terrorism is not right. It occurs though, its a phenomena to be understood. If using this point, such terrorism is understandable, for all human nature is understandable which is not the same as saying it is right. In history a nation can ignore this and can present the terrorists with the characteristics of "blood thirsty savages" as you said and take some advantage out of this portrayal. I am sorry. As I said, "I don't know a lot about it", which is an understatement. Hamas are probably a minority cult very unrepresentative of the Palestinian people but something is telling me they're not because I don't see the obvious denouncing of them by Palestinians, in the public arena in the West which would occur. I'm not seeing it right. I have little knowledge of it all.
With regard to "Saying that just because someone has pride in their country, they will become a warmongering imperialist is nonsense",
I didn't say that. There is a school of thought that modern nationalism is an ideology which in its mechanics and psychology is unavoidably imperialistic. I am sorry for presenting this as fact, I should have stated that it was a school of thought. But if true, "is there something wrong with this", there would be. I am not critical of people having "pride in their country", in fact its something I esteem and so encourage, patriotism though is very different to nationalism.
Regarding the view of Israel I presented in the last post, I think its worthwhile to examine how people come up with this view. It is a view that people do come to out of the mish-mash one gets from the media, and so is an understandable view even though perversely wrong.
I think the fact that it is understandable means that we could try and highlight how this view is being forged.
Just to say, I admire the Israeli nation on so many levels. Their innovation, their deep patriotism, their wonderful initiatives in the founding of the State and those up to its present, the historic beauty of the Jewish people returning home, their incredible revival of Hebrew, I could go on. The Israeli nation, and the Jewish people as a whole, I really admire and I wish I had more relationship with them in the course of my life. When I have met Israelis, I have found Israelis as being distinctly warm hearted which reminded me of what I find in my sense of Irish-ness, a familial warm heartedness.
All this is not though incompatible with a state who uses inhuman military tactics just as a demonised Hamas are made up of members who love their families and who probably have great hospitality.
With the mish mash presented to me, am I evil for coming up with the view I had. Maybe stupid?
But you know there's something niggling me that if people can't present the negative view on Israel which they may have formed, in a form of discussion to test it, without being thought of as stupid or evil, then all this will just come out as anti-semitism somewhere won't it.
In my whole life I've never had a discussion on Israel and Palestine with someone this is the first time.
After my postings here and comments received I think it will be a long time before I ever will again.
Only joking. Thank you sincerely for your post and apologies if I have offended anyone, especially those who have been affected by the conflict.
Thanks
Read more: irishcatholics.proboards.com/thread/336/israel-palestine#ixzz3d2fzi9vk
No Oliver, I'd love you to stay anyway. I can't speak for the others but I'd be surprised if they didn't as well.
|
|
|
Post by maolsheachlann on Jun 14, 2015 15:30:23 GMT
Absolutely. The whole purpose of the forum is exchange of ideas!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 14, 2015 18:18:36 GMT
Oliver,
I owe you an apology. As anyone on this forum site could probably tell you, I am not the most kind person when discussing controversial topics, and I usually end up being quite scathing in my criticism. I apologise for suggesting that you were trying to justify terrorism. That was too far. I do understand what you mean now; that seeing your land or your people being so heavily damaged would make it easier for you to do certain things you otherwise might not do.
I also apologise for misrepresenting what you meant with your comments on nationalism. I suppose when I think of nationalism, I just consider Irish people who take pride in what they already have, from the culture to the very soil of the land itself. I did not consider a different form of nationalism that takes it a step further into imperialism. I think I would have to put that down to Ireland being a small bit of land separated from the outside world, where as many other countries in the likes of the Middle East or Europe are right next to each other, possibly resulting in a different mindset.
I agree with you that just because a country is domestically nice, doesn't mean it is when it comes to foreign policies. I'm sure many people took pride in the good that the Nazi party did for Germany, but obviously there was great evil being done too; though some of that evil was being done on German soil too. While on the subject of evil, I did not mean to suggest that you were evil, or stupid. Nor do I think that you, or anyone else for that matter, should be labelled anti-Semitic just for criticising Israel.
I need to make 2 points here. The first is that I am not a professional on the entire subject either, but I do know the bits I have mentioned above from different things I've read since the conflict erupted again. The second is that I am actually not "Pro-Israel".See, there are 3 personality traits that I really hate in people, and one of them is deceitfulness. I don't believe Israel or its army or government is immaculate and can do no wrong. However, I look at what's being presented in the media, or what many people (especially around my age) have to say against Israel while portraying Gaza as angels, and I know it just isn't matching up. I'm basically playing Devil's Advocate, though as I have already said I can be quite scathing.
I know you said you were only joking, but I would encourage you not to refrain from a certain topic just because you might have had a bad experience. One of the other 3 personality traits I hate in people is arrogance. Something I heavily associate with arrogance is the mental beating down of someone to the point where they just shut up and keep quiet about that subject from then on. Though I wasn't intending to come across as arrogant, it is the feeling I am getting from your reply (not that you were calling me arrogant, just that you might feel like I was beating you down). I cannot stand people who use tactics like this to win an argument.
For that reason I would encourage you - even if you come back staunchly in favour of Gaza and against Israel - to keep participating. I would also say, no matter how humiliated or outnumbered you feel, do not be afraid to keep arguing your point against someone. There really is nothing to lose from it. Don't allow yourself to be pushed into silence - by me or anyone else. The worst case is you might face a bit of embarrassment but learn something. At best you might expose your rival for being all show and no substance.
Anyway, apologies once again for taking such an aggressive attitude towards your post. It's purely a flaw of mine, and not anything you did wrong.
God Bless
|
|