John Wright Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Does that make disagreeing with or mistrusting everything you say TJ turn posters into functional geniuses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted January 20, 2014 Share Posted January 20, 2014 No longer a fan of who? It goes without saying that if somebody agreed with absolutely everything somebody else said, then they would be, by definition, a functional imbecile. How did it feel to hear your idol speak words you didn't like to hear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted January 20, 2014 Author Share Posted January 20, 2014 No longer a fan of who? It goes without saying that if somebody agreed with absolutely everything somebody else said, then they would be, by definition, a functional imbecile. How did it feel to hear your idol speak words you didn't like to hear? Spiffy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted January 20, 2014 Author Share Posted January 20, 2014 Besides, I didn't actually disagree with anything Chomsky said. You seem to be assuming something about my opinion of Ariel Sharon, something I haven't actually posted. I think you assume I'm a blind supporter of him or the Israeli Government -- which is a bit absurd given that I'm a libertarian who's hostile to any and all government -- when all I've actually said was that Ariel Sharon was one of the most brilliant military tacticians of the latter half of the 20th century and I stand by that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
quilp Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Besides, I didn't actually disagree with anything Chomsky said. You seem to be assuming something about my opinion of Ariel Sharon, something I haven't actually posted. I think you assume I'm a blind supporter of him or the Israeli Government -- which is a bit absurd given that I'm a libertarian who's hostile to any and all government -- when all I've actually said was that Ariel Sharon was one of the most brilliant military tacticians of the latter half of the 20th century and I stand by that. Objectively, up until 'Barbarossa', many people said the same of Hitler's battle-planning. In both these men it was their ability to project the 'Triumph of the Will' that led them to their success in battle; instilling the belief in their forces that they were fighting for their existence. And copious amounts of Benzedrine. In Israel's case, snatching victory in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds was also down to the fact that the Arab alliance were all too confident of victory; assuming that by their sheer weight of ground forces and the element of surprise, it would be a walk-over. What they were totally unprepared for was the skill of the Israeli Air Force- their undeniable bravery and determination to fly sorties incessantly and gaining air-supremacy early-on by destroying the opposing air-power virtually on the ground. The out-dated russian tanks were also no match against the Israeli armour. It was a testimony to the modified British-designed Centurion tanks and munitions plus the revised strategy employed by General Tal, one of the many players in the subsequent victory. The outcomes relied on a great deal of luck also so let's not credit Sharon with too much of the 'glory'. ETA: I found this article of interest.... http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/51688 And this.... http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/51687 Definitely worth reading the full article from the link provided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Besides, I didn't actually disagree with anything Chomsky said. You seem to be assuming something about my opinion of Ariel Sharon, something I haven't actually posted. I think you assume I'm a blind supporter of him or the Israeli Government -- which is a bit absurd given that I'm a libertarian who's hostile to any and all government -- when all I've actually said was that Ariel Sharon was one of the most brilliant military tacticians of the latter half of the 20th century and I stand by that. I'll give you your due, you have two constants; Your incessant 'I'm a libertarian' and your advocacy of all things Jewish. Given your hostility to any and all government, what exactly is your view on the Israeli government then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alibaba Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Has everyone seen the wonderful 'Walt with Bashir'? If not, go watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 I'll give you your due, you have two constants; Your incessant 'I'm a libertarian' and your advocacy of all things Jewish. Given your hostility to any and all government, what exactly is your view on the Israeli government then? What do I think of the Israeli Government? They're a lot more competent than ours. But like all governments, including our own, they serve the ruling elite. They have an increasing gap between rich and poor, just like we do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 Besides, I didn't actually disagree with anything Chomsky said. You seem to be assuming something about my opinion of Ariel Sharon, something I haven't actually posted. I think you assume I'm a blind supporter of him or the Israeli Government -- which is a bit absurd given that I'm a libertarian who's hostile to any and all government -- when all I've actually said was that Ariel Sharon was one of the most brilliant military tacticians of the latter half of the 20th century and I stand by that. And Jimmy Savile was a really good sex offender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 How is defending your country from invasion and your people from genocide comparable with being a sex offender (whose offenses were covered up by the anti-Israel BBC)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sausages Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 As usual you've edited long after posting to take away a lot of the context. But what you originally said in your post immediately preceding mine, was that the Israeli govt were puppets of wealthy bankers intent of increasing the wealth gap, and you're opposed to all govt. Given that, it's strange to show admiration for a puppet acting on behalf of the wealthy in order to increase their own wealth by brutally killing people. He was, undoubtedly, really good at brutally killing people, as you say. Fred West would take his hat off to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 I was talking about ALL governments, not Israel in particular. You have distorted what I said. Sharon (when he was in the army) was defending his COUNTRY, not a puppet of GOVERNMENT. And governments are not COMPLETELY oriented to the rich. There is some semblance of democracy at work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lxxx Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 I was talking about ALL governments, not Israel in particular. You have distorted what I said. Sharon (when he was in the army) was defending his COUNTRY, not a puppet of GOVERNMENT. And governments are not COMPLETELY oriented to the rich. There is some semblance of democracy at work. Let me get this right. Sharon, whilst a butcherous military general carrying out the official policies of the Government at that time, was not a puppet of the Israeli government. That is what you are quite explicitly saying above, right? Just trying to ascertain on what planet you are coming from with this assertion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted January 21, 2014 Share Posted January 21, 2014 FFS TJ - Israel appointed its head of the Supreme Court, another Supreme Court Judge and a Major General in the IDF to investigate the deliberate massacre of civilian refuges.They reported that Sharon bore personal responsibility "for ignoring the danger of bloodshed and revenge" and "not taking appropriate measures to prevent bloodshed". He was found negligent in protecting the civilian population of Beirut, which had come under Israeli control, and this was a non-fulfillment of a duty with which the Defence Minister was charged under Israeli (and international) law.You have already admitted that you are admiring Sharon's military prowess and nothing else - just as Genghis Khan was no saint neither was Sharon. He was fully aware the Phalangist militiamen wanted revenge, but still allowed them to enter the refugee camps - to do what do you think - have tea with them?Mossad puts the number of dead at 700 to 800 - refugees, civilians, women, children, non-combatants.Yeah Sharon might have been a great general in 1973, but he was indifferent at best to the deliberate murder of hundreds of people in 1982. Are you surprised at quips equating him with Jimmy Saville? Do you really feel a need to defend him on this issue?Now personally I respect the Israeli state for conducting the investigation, being as open as possible about the events and holding individuals responsible. I also respect Sharon for being an inspiring general and especially for bulldozing Israel's political parties into a new configuration where the demographic realities of Fortress Israel are laid bare and the need for peace are shown in stark contrast against the religious fundamentalism of the Greater Israel zealots.But to ignore Shatila and Sharba and the events that happened there and not to acknowledge the brutality Sharon was personally a part of is to be blinded to reality. I don't defend the indefensible, but I acknowledge there was more to Sharon than just a war crime, just as there was more to him than being a great general in war. The Economist has a fair go in its Leader and Obituary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Jefferson Posted January 21, 2014 Author Share Posted January 21, 2014 I couldn't give a flying rats ass about any of this phony morality claptrap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.