Report: Israel storms Gaza-bound aid ships

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

So my question was how is it demonstrably false that Israel restricts supplies that can be used to construct rockets, underground bunkers and weapons factories?

Just because other items are included in the restrictions does not mean the original statement is false.

The English language, as well as formal logic learned in high school (in either math or English class), is our friend.

Let's re-examine the quote:

"But Israel restricts supplies that can be used to construct rockets, underground bunkers and weapons factories."

Since "supplies" can be substituted with specifics, let's do so remembering that the statement is true if all its various forms are true. If we substitute supplies with "trinitrotoluene" then the above phrase is true as you suggest. If we substitute with "dried fruit," it is false. Therefore, the above statement is false.

Had the author properly qualified the supplies, then it would be very true.

Language is great, and its impact and proper use is important.

Originally Posted by Bleeding Red

I am sure the list that was posted earlier is not the entire list.
I wouldn't be surprised if the excuse for some of these things is "they can hide weapons in those shipments".

Absolutely. Technically anything shipped in a box could be pointed at as being a "container" for contraband. I think that just points to the fact that the blockade, in its practical form, is both military (if i can use that word to denote contraband weapons) and economic. I support the military blockade, but I think the economic blockade is an act of collective punishment.

[Azure]

I think there is a point in saying that Israel is being a bit extreme with what they prohibit from crossing in.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by Azure

I think there is a point in saying that Israel is being a bit extreme with what they prohibit from crossing in.

I think there is also a point in saying that Israel is being a bit extreme with what they prohibit from crossing in, as long as rockets are still a threat. As long as the intended goal in Gaza (and their allies) is the destruction of Israel, than there are not too many people operating that border crossing that care much if they don't get nutmeg or some other item.

What I mean by all this is that there is a list of what is allowed. Period. I doubt Israel cares to spend that much time analyzing that list to add items, unless of course something is provided from the Gaza side (perhaps a kidnapped soldier, cessation of attacks, etc.). The list needs only be long enough to allow quick approval of the items, any longer and it becomes a problem.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Nage Waza

I think there is also a point in saying that Israel is being a bit extreme with what they prohibit from crossing in, as long as rockets are still a threat. As long as the intended goal in Gaza (and their allies) is the destruction of Israel, than there are not too many people operating that border crossing that care much if they don't get nutmeg or some other item.

And Hamas does operate out of Gaza, and uses it to shoot a lot of rockets into Israel.

It really is a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of deal.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

I hazard to guess you have never actually read any of his books.

Not to sound patronizing, it is just abundantly clear your first hand knowledge of his work is extremely shallow.

After reading just a few of your posts, it is just abundantly clear you follow his work as gospel.

[Nage Waza]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

Holy crap, did anyone else know that you could get high off of Nutmeg?

Clearly you have not read the Anarchist Cookbook!

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

Language is great, and its impact and proper use is important.

Behaving like an arrogant ass is an excellent way to undermine your own arguments regardless of how valid they are.

Just sayin'

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

Behaving like an arrogant ass is an excellent way to undermine your own arguments regardless of how valid they are.

Just sayin'

And here I thought you were going to (justly) correct the poor grammar in that sentence.

I think language is of extreme importance, and I analyze what is written as best I can. I also write in a matter-of-fact fashion, so what you're inferring is not implied.

I also prefer sticking to the topic at hand.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by Azure

It really is a damned if you do, damned if you don't kind of deal.

In that vein, I should point out that what concerns me the most in this situation is the viability of the state of Israel as we look into the future. The current trajectory is one wherein the Israelis have the most to lose. The Palestinians are impoverished and their infrastructure is dilapidated (to be kind), whereas conditions in Israel are the opposite. However, continued friction with neighbours will lead to increased isolationism and endanger Israel's economic strength and prosperity.

The demographic situation in and around Israel is the main reason why the country has to be mindful of its international stance. Palestinians in the occupied territories have a high birth rate. Inside Israel, there is also a significant minority of non-Jews, and already a discussion (and a level of friction) exists about the "character" of the Israeli state going forward. Allowing Israel proper to progress in the manner of a north american cultural mosaic (melting pot unlikely) will likely challenge the intertwining of religion and state that is characteristic of Israel (simply due to demographics). In other words, the one state solution isn't satisfying to those like me who would like to see Israel as a uniquely Jewish nation, because even with peace, the demographics will inevitably change the character of the state.

The two state solution works for me provided there is peace from the Palestinian side (duh!), but that simultaneously requires the Israeli side to grant it the right of self-determination (and the sticky point of moving some Israeli settlers away from their current location). A two state solution with blockades and embargos is simply a twist on the current status quo, and will not extricate Israel from the demographic pressures around it.

In the short run this war of attrition simply hardens middle east stances against Israel. In the long run, simply due to demographics, the current war of attrition is (imo) fatal for Israel. I think some politicians inside Israel recognize this (I think Livni does), but my perspective is that the current hawkish administration, along with some "prominent" voices in the US, are doing damage to Israel's prospects in the long run.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

And here I thought you were going to (justly) correct the poor grammar in that sentence.

I think language is of extreme importance, and I analyze what is written as best I can. I also write in a matter-of-fact fashion, so what you're inferring is not implied.

I also prefer sticking to the topic at hand.

And I thought I was a snob!

[ynwa03]

Originally Posted by peter12

And I thought I was a snob!

It's amusing how people like to defend a particular position until they are actually intellectually challenged by someone else. Then they just resort to changing the topic or name calling.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by ynwa03

It's amusing how people like to defend a particular position until they are actually intellectually challenged by someone else. Then they just resort to changing the topic or name calling.

Agreed? I was kidding based on past circumstances regarding my snobbiness in religious threads.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Flames Fan, Ph.D.

In other words, the one state solution isn't satisfying to those like me who would like to see Israel as a uniquely Jewish nation, because even with peace, the demographics will inevitably change the character of the state.

This is where I have issues with Israel. I realalize that the people around them want to eliminate them but the concept that a country should be able to define its culture and who lives their based on culture/religion is wrong to me.

Long term though I agree with you that Israel is going to have some significant population issues. And in a lot of ways demographics are more powerful at shaping the world than policy.

[Blaster86]

Originally Posted by GGG

This is where I have issues with Israel. I realalize that the people around them want to eliminate them but the concept that a country should be able to define its culture and who lives their based on culture/religion is wrong to me.

Except any culture or religion can live in Israel. They identify as a Jewish state just as the US seems to identify as a Christian one. That doesn't mean non-jews and non-christians are not allowed. It means that the majority will be Christian or Jewish.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by GGG

This is where I have issues with Israel. I realalize that the people around them want to eliminate them but the concept that a country should be able to define its culture and who lives their based on culture/religion is wrong to me.

Long term though I agree with you that Israel is going to have some significant population issues. And in a lot of ways demographics are more powerful at shaping the world than policy.

Every state identifies based on culture/religion. England is full of English people, France is full of French, Germany is full of Germans, Israel is full of Jews, and at one point Palestine will be full of Palestinians.

As Blaster pointed out Israel is also full of minorities. A place that isn't is the Gaza Strip, which is now home to only arabs and with the exception of a dwindling Christian community, which now only numbers a few thousand, entirely Sunni Muslim. Besides the Israeli "settlers" the West Bank doesn't look much different.

[mykalberta]

Oops - in thread fata - dont really want to read 17 pages...

This thread has taught me one thing...

What the frack a flotilla is.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

AP - French Judge (Jean-Louis Bruguiere) Says Turkish Charity Behind Gaza Flotilla Had Terror Ties

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...3ORHAD9G3D4QO0

That has been pointed out a while ago.

US has also said they have terror ties.

[octothorp]

Originally Posted by mykalberta

Oops - in thread fata - dont really want to read 17 pages...

This thread has taught me one thing...

What the frack a flotilla is.

It also means multiple floaters in the same bowl.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Blaster86

Except any culture or religion can live in Israel. They identify as a Jewish state just as the US seems to identify as a Christian one. That doesn't mean non-jews and non-christians are not allowed. It means that the majority will be Christian or Jewish.

If a one state Israel occurs the demographics in the region will eventually favour Muslims. Israel will not allow a situation in which jews become a minority. It is in their interests to have a 2 state solution so that they can perserve the jewish minority.

[Flames Fan, Ph.D.]

Originally Posted by blankall

As Blaster pointed out Israel is also full of minorities. A place that isn't is the Gaza Strip

When United stopped flying direct from Boston to Gaza City, that severely impacted the region.

Plus, I hear rumours that Carnival has suspended their Malta to Gaza Mediterranean pleasure cruise. That's gonna be a nightmare for the tourism industry.

(I'm here all week folks! Remember to tip your waitress! )