@mytwocentsworth came out swinging, and even used the term “final solution”. It might be they didn’t know what that meant, as evidenced by them not repeating it after I linked to the Holocaust Museum’s entry on it. Other outrageous statements are consistent with those early posts. If we are to have an open forum, accepting of all viewpoints, that includes people who used the label “Nazi” and those who advocate for defending a Jewish homeland. I would rather they met here than on a battlefield.
Yes. The way you apply it. It’s the law of the jungle, might makes right, killed or be killed. You miss the part just a few minutes after your timestamp, that we must adapt. The cockroach will do it out of instinct, out of whatever genetics give it the power to survive radiation, drought, and other disasters humans unleash. Why would he tell you? Is it inevitable? Is there nothing we can do? Are we as driven by tiny minds as cockroaches are?
Or, can we adapt? Can we use not just biology but our minds? Can we learn what is better for survival by passing on stories of how we almost wiped ourselves out, either by wars or by ignorance of disease? Will we look at nature and see violence or we will see the power of cooperation? Darwin spoke of both.
I am not getting the full legal picture of how the Palestinians operates after the Supreme Court was blown up.
Remember some years back when the Catholic Church would get in trouble and people would try and bring them to court. And the Church said they follow Vatican laws, not US laws and were exempt from US courts.
If our Supreme Court got blown up and shut down. No doubt our churches would go back to Vatican laws as quick as they can.
In the absent of Israel courts in Gaza being used. What is the court system right now in Gaza? There does not seem to be one other than the Islamic customary laws.
The reason I bring this up is because not long after the terrorists attack the Supreme Court got blown up.
The UN court rules Israel must prevent genocidal acts in Gaza.
UN did not say that Israel had to stop a war against Hamas.
UN said Israel should prevent genocide in any way or form. It did not say Israel was committing genocide.
There are Christians in Palestinian who are in fear for their life. Israel was asked to open the gate to let the Christians stay in a safer part of Israel.
Israel refused because the last time they did that for the Jewish population of Gaza. The Jewish population was not allowed back into Gaza. Today there are basely no Jewish population in Gaza.
The UN is still dealing with Darfur genocide. The way I understand what has taken place is that South Africa is backing the African National Congress (ANC) who is at odds with the Israel backed Sudan People’s Liberation Army/Movement (SPLA/M). So, South Africa sues Israel in the UN over Gaza. It all sounds political to me.
Point being. If Israel is not in Gaza. Then a genocide may well take place against the Christians and other non-Hanas groups.
Point being. The laws of Gaza today also apply a form of the Islamic customary law known as “that which is known”. Sometimes called the Urf laws.
Palestinian population of young, schooled terrorists may apply the customary laws. Which looks like were used to justify the acts of the Oct 7th attack.
That is a wrong analogy. Both aphorisms express a false equivalence.
“Might” (power) has nothing to do with “Right” (moralilty). That’s the tool of dictators like Putin.
“Kill or be killed” advocates for a “First strike”, which is not a Defensive action in line with the natural law of Cause and Effect (as I already observed before)
The proper aphorism is “Be prepared”
preparedness, noun
: the quality or state of being prepared
especially : a state of adequate preparation in case of war
I know it’s wrong. I’m saying “life must take life” is wrong when applied to human wars. War is not a direct result of our nature. It is decided, reasoned, prevented if possible. You have said it is a last resort. I don’t think Israel is anywhere near its last resort.
I consider what the said was an ad hominem of the highest order.
Consider if he had addressed you with that post?
The worst thing is that you agreed with him! It was a case of “might makes right” on your part.
It certainly was wrong where I am concerned.
I abhor killing. But that does not make it disappear. Sticking your head in the sand will not save you from a predator.
I appreciate your “gentle soul”, but don’t forget that man is an “invasive species” that has tried to divorce itself from natural law because man thinks he does not have to obey natural law.
Result: Anthopocene and mass extintion. An example that (perceived ) might does not make right.
I don’t know where you saw anyone agree with @mytwocentsworth. They agreed with you. A commenter can say they agree with anything. There is no rule against that. I have no way to know what they are thinking. If someone is contradicting themselves, then I could get suspicious that they are just arguing for the heck of it. But I don’t see that here.
But that is not the dilemma. The question is if Islamists are near their last resort. It is them that are fighting a thousand year war, not Jews, they have their own country now, to the chagrin of the Islamists.
Have you ever wondered why Iran is sponsoring all these terrorist factions?
I am confident that if terrorist stop bombing Israel, Israel will stop bombing them.
But today, Israel cannot allow Hamas any measure of victory, as that would only encourage them for another thousand years.
Israel has consistently expanded its territory since it became a nation. It never stopped. The Palestinian leadership has changed several times. Israel builds walls, reduces rights, builds homes in occupied territory, occupies more territory, shuts off highways, water, supplies. It has never stopped.
Then why post the Hellstrom piece? I think you make arguments then forget where you were going with them. This thread never goes anywhere because it never stays on track.
to the mods, please close this thread !!!
It is more and more a repetitive exchange, nothing advancing.
1 Like
OK, I agree with that problem (individual?) Israelis are causing, though I am not sure if that is state sponsored invasion, and should rightly belong in civil court, not warrant a killing spree of innocent and peaceful Israelis inside Israel
Because that is the inescapable arbiter of who lives and who dies, Whereas humans are committing suicide from hubris that the earth belongs to us to do with as we please.
Maybe, maybe not. I have often found that those who say they know better do not know.
Of course that argument applies to you as well… 
But all of this proves the wisdom of refraining from personal ad hominem in a public forum in the first place.
Then maybe you should stop commenting in this thread before we honour someone’s request to shut this thread down, because you just said what you’ve been posting, not to mention your personal opinions trying to force people to believe what you believe. Doesn’t work like that, not with this group of people at least. Maybe in a more gullible forum, but not here.
I responded to this and you ignored it. That’s what I’m saying about this thread, there’s no consistent line of thought from you. I respond to one thing and you bring up something else.
I put one of the other political threads on slow mode. Posting allowed once every four hours. Makes is more pleasant
There is state sponsored invasion. I’m sure of that.
No.
The article says Hamas is unrealistic, and says they should not be. I agree with that. Your question makes me think you aren’t understanding what you are reading.