Where are the Christians?

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by scandium

Agreed. The results when one airs an opinion contrary to the dominant one is a very real threat to a fragile mind or weak character. This is why the current U.S. President surrounds himself with sycophants, appears only before pre-selected audiences composed only of the party faithful, and doesn't read newspapers.

Has nothing to do with that. But you try and twist it that way anyway, but no ones buying. The simple fact is, you have an article that you can't defend, and it is along the same lines of other threads you have posted in in which you also failed to defend this same idea, yet you continue your twist of incorrect fact in the face of overwhelming logic. You have gone beyond weak mind and character of yourself by beating a dead horse with only pride (and hidden agenda) as your only fight left - and this is after you have lost, and everyone is just standing around watching you make a fool of yourself.

The funny part is the article you are taking from is from a man with an agenda of his own that my family has met one on one personally! It is strictly a politcal motivated article! Attack Bush allows you to sway democratic votes to your side. We like Buchanan since he upsets the party vote, but that is all we like him for.

I am sorry, i am about to start laughing, but I will keep my composure. The attack on Bush also pathetic since all evidence is to the contrary! He hits the press room all the time with frothing press people ready to tear him up! Too funny! The only people he won't meet is the NAACP, which I wouldn't either if they associated the dragging of a black man, and his subsequent death as related to me in some way.

But, by all means, please continue since this is getting rather entertaining... I'll just stand on the sidelines to watch what happens like everyone else! I'm sure the slinging tomatoes will continue to pummel you.

-S

PS. One thing of note, you have entered into a forum where the party line is never the path followed. You are surrounded by people who all have their own opinions and they all have their own original thoughts. But you can keep billing it some other way if you want since it makes little difference.

PPS. Sorry for being so harsh, but I am just calling it like I see it.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Has nothing to do with that. But you try and twist it that way anyway, but no ones buying.

You know you keep throwing around this "it and "that" but nothing I can read in what you've quoted refers to whatever it is that I'm supposed to be selling, other than that whatever it is its supposedly related to Michael Moore, internet conspiracy theories, and the anti-christ. Maybe I'm not trying to sell anything, maybe you just forgot to take your medication today

The simple fact is, you have an article that you can't defend, and it is along the same lines of other threads you have posted in in which you also failed to defend this same idea, yet you continue your twist of incorrect fact in the face of overwhelming logic.

Defend it against what? Nobody's even read the article so what is it I'm supposed to defend?

You have gone beyond weak mind and character of yourself by beating a dead horse with only pride (and hidden agenda) as your only fight left - and this is after you have lost, and everyone is just standing around watching you make a fool of yourself.

See above. And I'm not the one beating a dead horse, given that wiuthout even reading the article the thread is about, you never the less saw fit to hijack the thread to berate me on this supposed agenda which you can't even seem to pin down (perhaps because it isn't there). My impression of you so far, just in this thread, is that you are so hysterically fearful of whatever the article might contain that rather than simply debate the merits of it, you instead try and discredit it by shooting the messenger. Yet I have the weak mind?

The funny part is the article you are taking from is from a man with an agenda of his own that my family has met one on one personally! It is strictly a politcal motivated article!

Which you haven't even read.

Attack Bush allows you to sway democratic votes to your side. We like Buchanan since he upsets the party vote, but that is all we like him for.

Okay now you're just coming completely unglued. As I am not American, I have no "side" to sway votes to; And I poke fun at Bush from time to time because, believe it or not, he's a bit of a laughing stock outside the US and a lot of us foreigners make fun of him. And in a way, its his own fault: I used to laugh at Baghdad Bob as he is by far the funnier of the two, but now there is no longer a Baghdad Bob to laugh at so I have to settle for Bush.

I am sorry, i am about to start laughing, but I will keep my composure. The attack on Bush also pathetic since all evidence is to the contrary! He hits the press room all the time with frothing press people ready to tear him up! Too funny!

Its good to know I am not the only one laughing at this exchange, because the idea of Bush taking really confrontational questions in a Parlimentary style debate just cracks me up. I have seen your Washington press in action and the word that comes to mind to me is actually "docile". Trained puppies afraid to lob anything heavier than softballs lest they embarass the Pres and get shut out of further access to him.

The only people he won't meet is the NAACP, which I wouldn't either if they associated the dragging of a black man, and his subsequent death as related to me in some way.

No idea what you're talking about here.

But, by all means, please continue since this is getting rather entertaining... I'll just stand on the sidelines to watch what happens like everyone else! I'm sure the slinging tomatoes will continue to pummel you.

*shrug* I put out my point of view and if I get some good debate out of it, and I usually do, then that's all I'm interested in. As to slinging tomatoes, I could care less. Fire away.

[Skybird]

You are too convinced of your article, Scandium. You assume that everyone reading it must see it that way. And if someone does not see it that way and does not agree, then he hasn'T red it. The possebility that people, or me, have red it, but simply are not only not convinced, but turned away by it's suggestive language and massively biased direction does not seem to be on your mind.

You also have defined WHAT goal Israel may go for, but told us only HOW it may NOT do so - we still wait for the answer HOW it should go for it instead. Is this another question you will not answer - while holding others guilty of ignoring your questions for whom answers has been given since long, and often repeatedly? Don't tell us what restricts Israel - tell us what it should do to get rid of the threat by Palestinian terror.

Simple truth is - you don't like what is going on right now. Same for me. But you do not have a realistic alternative to offer that goes beyond the heart-warming daydreaming of the UN and the EU and that could work not only in dreams, but in the grim world that we have. The only world.

[jumpy]

Originally Posted by Skybird

You also have defined WHAT goal Israel may go for, but told us only HOW it may NOT do so - we still wait for the answer HOW it should go for it instead. Is this another question you will not answer - while holding others guilty of ignoring your questions for whom answers has been given since long, and often repeatedly? Don't tell us what restricts Israel - tell us what it should do to get rid of the threat by Palestinian terror.

Simple truth is - you don't like what is going on right now. Same for me. But you do not have a realistic alternative to offer that goes beyond the heart-warming daydreaming of the UN and the EU and that could work not only in dreams, but in the grim world that we have. The only world.

Well I'm sure if Scandium (or anyone else for that matter) had the 'final solution' -perhaps a bad turn of prase there I shall rephrase - or the ultimate answer to all of the troubles in the ME/Israel/Palestine etc then he wouldn't be sitting here endlessly debating the issue with you lot.
Imho I think punnishing the majority for the misdeeds of the apparent few is a totaly BS way to achieve a peaceful resolution the the current debacle - that's all well and good when attempting to control an unruly classroom full of kids hehe, but in that instance nobody is going to get blown up by a 5oolb laser guided bomb, are they?

hello, pot? this is kettle...

Pffft, asside from bludgeoning civillians with artillery and air to ground missiles and bombs, and breaking international law prohibiting the targeting of essential civillian infrastructure and carrying out the threat to turn the clock back 20 years in Lebanon, what is the IDF doing right?
Sadly I have no more idea on how to realistically solve the problem which has been festering away over there for decades and longer, than any of the rest of you people. Does that mean I should just forget about it, sweep it under the carpet away from consideration and the light of day? Resign the issue to parriah status only worthy only of distain and ridicule should anybody see fit to instigate discussion, regardless of merrit? No.

The article itself (at least to me) did not seem overly pedantic or selfrightious; unlike some of the posts appearing here :rotfl:

[scandium]

I'll post my reply to the questions asked of me with what I just said in another thread; and I'll preface it by adding that this is no "agenda", this is simple disgust at the treatment of Canadians by a supposed "friend" and "ally" of ours:

Hezbollah fires rockets at an Israeli town and kidnaps two soldiers. Israel retaliates by levelling Lebanon without warning or consideration for the tens of thousands of foreign nationals there who its actions, in bombing ports, roads, bridges, and the international airport have cut off from escaping the country - for a week - that they have turned into a warzone, killing 8 Canadian civillians in the process and severely injuring several others. By their own standards, this is an act of war against Canada, and an act of callous disregard by any standard.

But is Canada mobilizing for an all out war with Israel in kind, or even any kind of relatiation? No, we are just trying our best - within the limits imposed upon us by Israel and the IDF - to get our people out. Our own PM even diverted his own military A330 Airbus to Cypress to pick up as many stranded Canadian refugees as possible.

Meanwhile the US has finally landed 1,200 marines into Lebanon to get its own people out - all of this a week after events began, events that - without warning of any kind - turned our citizens into trapped refugees who are at the mercy of the IDF.

Meanwhile 500 German nationals are being evacuated to Syria.

You know, I don't have the solution to what Israel should do, but unlike you folks I'm not going to applaud this callous treatment, and killings, of my own fellow Canadians whose only fault was unknowingly being in a place Israel decided without warning to level, trapping them there in the process and putting their lives at risk as it bombed and shelled the country with them in it.

While I applaud my PM's personal efforts to get some of our people out, I find our government's otherwise apparent apathy and indifference to Israel's conduct disgusting. I no longer consider Israel any ally of ours because you don't treat your friends and allies this way.

And for you August, it is even more ironic given that its your own country's weapons and $3 billion/year subsidy to Israel that is being used to hold your citizens hostage in a foreign country turned warzone by the IDF. And not even a heads up to your embassy in Lebanon before hand so that you might get your people out first; no, instead the warning comes in the form of the bombing of the International airport trapping them there.

That the US has to send 1,200 Marines in a week later to rescue its people from the threat posed to them by one of its, supposedly, close allies and puppet states doesn't bother you August.

Personally I see this and I have to wonder which country is really the puppet state, and which country - just like its citizens - is the one held hostage to events of the other's making.

So to come back to your question about a solution to Israel's problem - why should I give a damn about them or their problems when they so blatantly could give a damn about Canadians when only just this week the IDF killed 8 of them? I don't, not any more. The hell with them as far as I'm concerned.

[Skybird]

Joea,

You cannot hit and hurt an enemy that uses the civilian infrastructure to hide and to move - without hitting that civilian infrastructure. A ammo depot in the backroom of a little store or restaurant - a fighter'S hideout beside a school, bridges and electricity that he uses as well as the civilian population - these are the reasons why this enemy is labelled as terrorist, inseads of regular army (ignoring the fact the the Israelis accept to hit civilians when going for their enemy, while the terrorist delibertaly chooses to hit the civilian population with full intention). It's a dilemma, and the only choices there are: to tolerate terrorist organization and getting assaulted by them becauses of that tolerance until the end of time, or to accept to inflict civilian casualties as well while going for them. Such is war with one enemy hiding in civilian infrastructure.

[Skybird]

Scandium,

I do not applaude this fighting. Get that into your head: i do not applaude it, and I do not like it, but I see no alternative. Since the beginning of the second intifada, more than 1100 Israelis civilians had been murdered by missiles and suicide bombers, the overwhelming majoirty by the latter. Israel is suffering from ongoing massive terror on a regular basis for years - this is the reason why finally, after having had patience for years, they take the two missing soldiers as an excuse now to finally, FINALLY, reach out with all force and power. They also do not want to negotiate with those that are responsible for the massmurder amongst Israelis in recent years.

I do not like all this, but I see no alternative to fighting when fighting is force upon you by an enemy without moral standards and ethical founded self-restrictions, but who is cynical enough to hide himself within civilian structures in the hope that this would prevent his opponent to shoot at him. This time this enemy obviously has been wrong. the Lebanese are suffering because of Hizbollah's ignorrance for their vital interests, and Iran's and Syria's desinterest as well.

[scandium]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Scandium,

I do not applaude this fighting. Get that into your head: i do not applaude it, and I do not like it, but I see no alternative. Since the beginning of the second intifada, more than 1100 Israelis civilians had been murdered by missiles and suicide bombers. Israel is suffering from ongoing massive terror on a regular basis for years - this is the reason why finally, after having had patience for years, they take the two missing soldiers as an excuse now to finally, FINALLY, reach out with all force and power. Theyx also do not want to negotiate with those that are responsible for the massmurder amongst Israelis in recent years.

I do not like all this, but I see no alternative to fighting when fighting is force dupon you by an enemy without moral standards and ethical, restrictions and cynical enough to hide himself within civilian structures in the hope that this would prevent his opponent to shoot at him. This time this enemy obviously has been wrong. the Lebanse are suffering because of Hizbollah's ignorrance for their vital interests, and Iran's and Syria's desinterest as well. The ordinary people - are pawns in a game only.

Its not only the Lebanese who are suffering as a result of Israel's actions. Consider this dry timeline and the effect on those citizens of the most powerful country in the world which is suddenly paralyzed and embarassed by its own puppet state in what becomes the biggest exodus of US nationals from foreign soil since the Vietnam war:

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...s/15068159.htm

Following is a timeline of the U.S. government's efforts to evacuate Americans from Lebanon:

July 12 - Hezbollah gunmen kill three Israeli soldiers and kidnap two. Israeli forces retaliate by pounding Lebanon. Beirut International Airport is bombed. The U.S. Embassy in Lebanon urges Americans to review their security and travel plans.

July 13 - The embassy urges American citizens to avoid nonessential travel in Lebanon.

July 14 - The embassy authorizes the families of embassy staff members and non-emergency American employees to leave. It urges Americans in Lebanon to evaluate their security and consider departing, and it advises those who remain to keep low profiles and vary times and routes for all required travel.

July 15 - The embassy announces that it's working with the Department of Defense on a plan to help American citizens depart Lebanon through the island nation of Cyprus. The State Department reminds Americans that it doesn't provide free transportation for evacuees, but says it's authorized to provide repatriation loans to those in financial need.

July 16 - U.S. Marine Corps helicopters begin ferrying small numbers of Americans from the embassy compound north of Beirut to Cyprus.

July 17 - The Pentagon announces that it's contracted a Greek cruise ship, the Orient Queen, escorted by an American destroyer, to evacuate Americans from Lebanon. There are an estimated 25,000 Americans in Lebanon; the ship can carry 750 passengers.

July 18 - The embassy announces that it's "monitoring the situation in Lebanon closely" and "reviewing all options" for assisting Americans who want to leave. The embassy says further information will be released by the media and in embassy announcements and warden messages. Americans who wish to depart are told that they should prepare passports and other important travel documents, including birth certificates, marriage certificates and medical records. Those who leave will be allowed one small suitcase.

The Pentagon announces that nine other Navy vessels, additional helicopters and a Saudi Arabian cruise ship will join the evacuation. The State Department announces plans to evacuate more than 2,400 Americans by sea and air. At least 5,000 are expected to leave.

So if you're an American living in Lebanon, four days after Israel begins pounding Lebanon, you have two choices: Leave everything you own behind except that which you can carry in one suitcase, or remain in Lebanon and pray the Israeli Defence Force doesn't kill you in one of their bombing raids. Not that this should be a difficult choice to make, but its a little ironic that you have to make this choice when its your tax dollars that are financing the Israeli demolition of your home (hopefully without you in) and belongings, and the half baked measures that makes this necessary because Israel could care less since it gets its 3 billion/year subsidy and US veto in the UN no matter what it does, or who it victimizes. And to my mind, these Americans in Lebanon are victims, and it isn't the Lebanese government or people that are terrorizing and displacing them from their homes, either. Because to Israel, if this treatment is good enough for Palestinians, its good enough for Americans too. (and everyone else).

[joea]

Originally Posted by Skybird

Joea,

You cannot hit and hurt an enemy that uses the civilian infrastructure to hide and to move - without hitting that civilian infrastructure. A ammo depot in the backroom of a little store or restaurant - a fighter'S hideout beside a school, bridges and electricity that he uses as well as the civilian population - these are the reasons why this enemy is labelled as terrorist, inseads of regular army (ignoring the fact the the Israelis accept to hit civilians when going for their enemy, while the terrorist delibertaly chooses to hit the civilian population with full intention). It's a dilemma, and the only choices there are: to tolerate terrorist organization and getting assaulted by them becauses of that tolerance until the end of time, or to accept to inflict civilian casualties as well while going for them. Such is war with one enemy hiding in civilian infrastructure.

Actually have not posted on this thread yet, but yes I was worried and am heartbroken by what is happening. I fully understand what war is about and realise there is no way to eliminate civilian casualties. I do question whether this method will obtain the required results and was necessary. I think eventually Isreal will negotiate with Hezzbola and Hamas. They are major political players whether we like it or not. As to the issues of terror groups using civilian infrastructure to hide and work in...well what else is new? Guerrilla and like movements have done this for ages.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Skybird

There is at least a fourth strong lobby: the defense lobby.

Being that the military is under the direct ownership and operation of the federal government, it can hardly be considered a third-party interest group. However, I do take your point on high military spending.

[Skybird]

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

Being that the military is under the direct ownership and operation of the federal government, it can hardly be considered a third-party interest group. However, I do take your point on high military spending.

I think the relations between the Pentagon and the defense industry are bit more complicated than that. But that is another can of worms.

[bradclark1]

I think eventually Isreal will negotiate with Hezzbola and Hamas.

I think that will happen when pigs fly.

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by scandium

You know you keep throwing around this "it and "that" but nothing I can read in what you've quoted refers to whatever it is that I'm supposed to be selling, other than that whatever it is its supposedly related to Michael Moore, internet conspiracy theories, and the anti-christ. Maybe I'm not trying to sell anything, maybe you just forgot to take your medication today

Defend it against what? Nobody's even read the article so what is it I'm supposed to defend?

See above. And I'm not the one beating a dead horse, given that wiuthout even reading the article the thread is about, you never the less saw fit to hijack the thread to berate me on this supposed agenda which you can't even seem to pin down (perhaps because it isn't there). My impression of you so far, just in this thread, is that you are so hysterically fearful of whatever the article might contain that rather than simply debate the merits of it, you instead try and discredit it by shooting the messenger. Yet I have the weak mind?

Which you haven't even read.

Okay now you're just coming completely unglued. As I am not American, I have no "side" to sway votes to; And I poke fun at Bush from time to time because, believe it or not, he's a bit of a laughing stock outside the US and a lot of us foreigners make fun of him. And in a way, its his own fault: I used to laugh at Baghdad Bob as he is by far the funnier of the two, but now there is no longer a Baghdad Bob to laugh at so I have to settle for Bush.

Its good to know I am not the only one laughing at this exchange, because the idea of Bush taking really confrontational questions in a Parlimentary style debate just cracks me up. I have seen your Washington press in action and the word that comes to mind to me is actually "docile". Trained puppies afraid to lob anything heavier than softballs lest they embarass the Pres and get shut out of further access to him.

No idea what you're talking about here.

*shrug* I put out my point of view and if I get some good debate out of it, and I usually do, then that's all I'm interested in. As to slinging tomatoes, I could care less. Fire away.

blah blah blah blah. Obviously you don't even take in what I say, and when I talk about the NAACP, I give you an example to your own arguments, and like with everybody else, your own arguments disappear in smoke when its purely convenient! Nice. What am I talking to here? Someone who has amnesia on comand when it suits his purpose? Seems I missed a lot since I've been gone.

I mean, what does not living in America have to with.. for example? And, when your entire conversation revolves around a man, and then you discount that that is what your conversation is about when its convenient....time to switch back to christians! oh! Time to switch back to Bush!....

The list is endless. your entire reply is all nonsense!

I even see more anti scandium threads popping up! Now why could that be?

-S

PS. Maybe I'll go make one of my own.

PPS. You and Kerry would get along real good - always switching sides!