Defining Terrorism

[Loren Pechtel]

You're taking what I said out of context.

The families profit financially from the acts of the bombers (and to a lesser degree from those who end up in Israeli jail over their terrorism). The WTC brought no profits from attacking Muslims.

No, you are adding needless context to what I said to avoid the point.

Do you agree that destroying buildings along with their occupants is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

At this point I'm confused.

No shit.

You made a claim: "Israel is taking action to remove the financial gain they would otherwise get, thus reducing an incentive to become a martyr in the first place."

However the 'action' in question is the demolition of people's homes. Hence my question: Do you agree that destroying buildings along with their occupants is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

Where are you getting the "along with their occupants" bit??

When Israel bulldozes a house it's empty. There appear to have been a few cases where Hamas left a cripple in a supposedly-empty house to be killed to frame Israel but that's not the same thing at all.

 

[bilby]

You're taking what I said out of context.

The families profit financially from the acts of the bombers (and to a lesser degree from those who end up in Israeli jail over their terrorism). The WTC brought no profits from attacking Muslims.

No, you are adding needless context to what I said to avoid the point.

Do you agree that destroying buildings along with their occupants is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

At this point I'm confused.

No shit.

You made a claim: "Israel is taking action to remove the financial gain they would otherwise get, thus reducing an incentive to become a martyr in the first place."

However the 'action' in question is the demolition of people's homes. Hence my question: Do you agree that destroying buildings along with their occupants is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

Where are you getting the "along with their occupants" bit??

When Israel bulldozes a house it's empty.

OK; Do you agree that destroying buildings that people call home is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

If you went out to buy a quart of milk, and came home to find that someone had bulldozed your house while you were gone, would you consider this to be perfectly acceptable if it turned out that the demolition was ordered by someone to whom you owed money?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're taking what I said out of context.

The families profit financially from the acts of the bombers (and to a lesser degree from those who end up in Israeli jail over their terrorism). The WTC brought no profits from attacking Muslims.

No, you are adding needless context to what I said to avoid the point.

Do you agree that destroying buildings along with their occupants is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

At this point I'm confused.

No shit.

You made a claim: "Israel is taking action to remove the financial gain they would otherwise get, thus reducing an incentive to become a martyr in the first place."

However the 'action' in question is the demolition of people's homes. Hence my question: Do you agree that destroying buildings along with their occupants is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

Where are you getting the "along with their occupants" bit??

When Israel bulldozes a house it's empty.

OK; Do you agree that destroying buildings that people call home is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

If you went out to buy a quart of milk, and came home to find that someone had bulldozed your house while you were gone, would you consider this to be perfectly acceptable if it turned out that the demolition was ordered by someone to whom you owed money?

You just did a major moving of the goalposts.

And how about thinking of the consequences before raising their kids to hate?

 

[Davka]

Wrong again. They started with Iran's proxy, hizballah, who funneled them through Hamas and Islamic Jihad. And they began many YEARS after Israel instituted the policy of punishing families for the actions of their grown children.

It started more than 25 years ago with Saddam. Long before the house destructions.

Where the fuck do you get this drivel, Loren? FOX news? W's CIA reports? During the height of the Intifada, Iraq was paying a meager $25k to families of suicide bombers, hardly enough to pay for a crappy used car in Israel, let alone a house. Israel's stated rationale for the demolitions has NOTHING to do with these payments. It is supposed to act as a deterrent against future suicide bombings, but there is no evidence to indicate that it does anything other than create more terrorists.

Oh, and the home demolitions started under the British Mandate. Israel revived the practice during the 2nd Intifada.

 

[bilby]

You're taking what I said out of context.

The families profit financially from the acts of the bombers (and to a lesser degree from those who end up in Israeli jail over their terrorism). The WTC brought no profits from attacking Muslims.

No, you are adding needless context to what I said to avoid the point.

Do you agree that destroying buildings along with their occupants is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

At this point I'm confused.

No shit.

You made a claim: "Israel is taking action to remove the financial gain they would otherwise get, thus reducing an incentive to become a martyr in the first place."

However the 'action' in question is the demolition of people's homes. Hence my question: Do you agree that destroying buildings along with their occupants is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

Where are you getting the "along with their occupants" bit??

When Israel bulldozes a house it's empty.

OK; Do you agree that destroying buildings that people call home is rather more than a purely financial transaction?

If you went out to buy a quart of milk, and came home to find that someone had bulldozed your house while you were gone, would you consider this to be perfectly acceptable if it turned out that the demolition was ordered by someone to whom you owed money?

You just did a major moving of the goalposts.

Translation - I am refusing to answer your latest question and hoping nobody notices

And how about thinking of the consequences before raising their kids to hate?

Well your parents obviously failed to take that advice. Why do you imagine that your hate should be consequence-free?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It started more than 25 years ago with Saddam. Long before the house destructions.

Where the fuck do you get this drivel, Loren? FOX news? W's CIA reports? During the height of the Intifada, Iraq was paying a meager $25k to families of suicide bombers, hardly enough to pay for a crappy used car in Israel, let alone a house. Israel's stated rationale for the demolitions has NOTHING to do with these payments. It is supposed to act as a deterrent against future suicide bombings, but there is no evidence to indicate that it does anything other than create more terrorists.

Oh, and the home demolitions started under the British Mandate. Israel revived the practice during the 2nd Intifada.

$25k should be judged by Palestinian standards, not Israeli standards. I can't find separate stats for Gaza but it's over 8 years of per capita GDP for Gaza + West Bank--and Gaza is worse off so it's even more.

And what happened under the British Mandate is irrelevant. Your timeline is after Saddam started the pattern of paying the families.

 

[laughing dog]

Where the fuck do you get this drivel, Loren? FOX news? W's CIA reports? During the height of the Intifada, Iraq was paying a meager $25k to families of suicide bombers, hardly enough to pay for a crappy used car in Israel, let alone a house. Israel's stated rationale for the demolitions has NOTHING to do with these payments. It is supposed to act as a deterrent against future suicide bombings, but there is no evidence to indicate that it does anything other than create more terrorists.

Oh, and the home demolitions started under the British Mandate. Israel revived the practice during the 2nd Intifada.

$25k should be judged by Palestinian standards, not Israeli standards. I can't find separate stats for Gaza but it's over 8 years of per capita GDP for Gaza + West Bank--and Gaza is worse off so it's even more.

And what happened under the British Mandate is irrelevant. Your timeline is after Saddam started the pattern of paying the families.

With all the cherry-picking in your posts, one would expect an excellent cherry pie instead of a bullshit tart.

 

[Davka]

Where the fuck do you get this drivel, Loren? FOX news? W's CIA reports? During the height of the Intifada, Iraq was paying a meager $25k to families of suicide bombers, hardly enough to pay for a crappy used car in Israel, let alone a house. Israel's stated rationale for the demolitions has NOTHING to do with these payments. It is supposed to act as a deterrent against future suicide bombings, but there is no evidence to indicate that it does anything other than create more terrorists.

Oh, and the home demolitions started under the British Mandate. Israel revived the practice during the 2nd Intifada.

$25k should be judged by Palestinian standards, not Israeli standards. I can't find separate stats for Gaza but it's over 8 years of per capita GDP for Gaza + West Bank--and Gaza is worse off so it's even more.

And what happened under the British Mandate is irrelevant. Your timeline is after Saddam started the pattern of paying the families.

I used to purchase building supplies in the West Bank. Don't pretend to understand the Israeli/Palestinian economy, Loren.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

$25k should be judged by Palestinian standards, not Israeli standards. I can't find separate stats for Gaza but it's over 8 years of per capita GDP for Gaza + West Bank--and Gaza is worse off so it's even more.

And what happened under the British Mandate is irrelevant. Your timeline is after Saddam started the pattern of paying the families.

With all the cherry-picking in your posts, one would expect an excellent cherry pie instead of a bullshit tart.

In other words you have no rebuttal so you attack instead.

- - - Updated - - -

$25k should be judged by Palestinian standards, not Israeli standards. I can't find separate stats for Gaza but it's over 8 years of per capita GDP for Gaza + West Bank--and Gaza is worse off so it's even more.

And what happened under the British Mandate is irrelevant. Your timeline is after Saddam started the pattern of paying the families.

I used to purchase building supplies in the West Bank. Don't pretend to understand the Israeli/Palestinian economy, Loren.

GDP tells you a lot about what it's like.

In reality it overstates it because the terrorists get more, everybody else gets less.

 

[Davka]

With all the cherry-picking in your posts, one would expect an excellent cherry pie instead of a bullshit tart.

In other words you have no rebuttal so you attack instead.

- - - Updated - - -

$25k should be judged by Palestinian standards, not Israeli standards. I can't find separate stats for Gaza but it's over 8 years of per capita GDP for Gaza + West Bank--and Gaza is worse off so it's even more.

And what happened under the British Mandate is irrelevant. Your timeline is after Saddam started the pattern of paying the families.

I used to purchase building supplies in the West Bank. Don't pretend to understand the Israeli/Palestinian economy, Loren.

GDP tells you a lot about what it's like.

In reality it overstates it because the terrorists get more, everybody else gets less.

Just when I think you cannot possibly show your ass any more blatantly...

 

[untermensche]

According to a lot of people in this thread the attacks of 9/11/01 were not terrorist attacks since both the WTC and the Pentagon were valid military targets.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In other words you have no rebuttal so you attack instead.

- - - Updated - - -

$25k should be judged by Palestinian standards, not Israeli standards. I can't find separate stats for Gaza but it's over 8 years of per capita GDP for Gaza + West Bank--and Gaza is worse off so it's even more.

And what happened under the British Mandate is irrelevant. Your timeline is after Saddam started the pattern of paying the families.

I used to purchase building supplies in the West Bank. Don't pretend to understand the Israeli/Palestinian economy, Loren.

GDP tells you a lot about what it's like.

In reality it overstates it because the terrorists get more, everybody else gets less.

Just when I think you cannot possibly show your ass any more blatantly...

You continue to show you have no understanding of what's going on over there. The money goes to the terrorists. The government deliberately keeps the population impoverished to encourage people to join up.

- - - Updated - - -

According to a lot of people in this thread the attacks of 9/11/01 were not terrorist attacks since both the WTC and the Pentagon were valid military targets.

It's only been your side that tried to pretend the WTC was a valid target.

 

[untermensche]

It's only been your side that tried to pretend the WTC was a valid target.

My side?

Attacking a nations economy is a valid military objective.

 

[Davka]

You continue to show you have no understanding of what's going on over there.

...says the man who has never been there (except possibly as a tourist) to the one who lived there for over 7 years, speaks modern Hebrew, has dual citizenship, and is in constant contact with family in Jerusalem, Rishon L'Tzion, and Rehovot.

You are talking out your ass, Loren. As usual.

 

[Togo]

As usual he's pronouncing on the motivations of people he's never met.

 

[Valjean]

Israel/Palestine might not be the best example.

Better examples: Drone attacks on Afghan or Pakistani homes believed to house Taliban members, but which could reasonably be expected to house women and children as well.

The US invasion of Panama to capture/overthrow a former CIA operative who was no longer playing ball and had become an embarrassment. As many as 4,000 killed and 15,000 displaced civilians.

The "rescue operation" in Grenada, which killed several hundred and "rescued" no-one.

None of these would have occurred within the borders of the US, but outside the borders a different morality applies. It doesn't matter if innocents are killed, as long as one's objective is achieved.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Israel/Palestine might not be the best example.

Better examples: Drone attacks on Afghan or Pakistani homes believed to house Taliban members, but which could reasonably be expected to house women and children as well.

The US invasion of Panama to capture/overthrow a former CIA operative who was no longer playing ball and had become an embarrassment. As many as 4,000 killed and 15,000 displaced civilians.

The "rescue operation" in Grenada, which killed several hundred and "rescued" no-one.

None of these would have occurred within the borders of the US, but outside the borders a different morality applies. It doesn't matter if innocents are killed, as long as one's objective is achieved.

Right or wrong, none of these sound like terrorism.