History will always repeat

[Shaide]

When I read this article:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...mideast24.html
I felt the history will always repeat, in one way or other way, but the humans will make the same errors.
For example, think about Napoleon and Hitler. They wanted to conquer Russian, and together attacked them in the worse winter they had.
I think there are a lot of coincidential success in other differents time, and this success will repeat in short or long time.
I dont mean Jewish are making the same errors that Nazis did because the situation is so different, but this situation remember these errors, Israel is a rich nation like Germany was then moreover Israel have a powerfull army like Germany was. Israel have palestian refugees camp of Palestian like nazis had... Could be a coincidence?
What do say the old jewish refugees if they could see that their sons is making?
Moreover If they could watch in tv the same news we can, what do you believe they would think when they watched these imagens?, they would say these imagens is about second world war.

What do you think about friends?
Is the history repeting?

Shaide

[shamrock_uk]

I don't think its repeating as such, although I'd seen that story a few days ago. I'm sorry for all the flak he's taking, he didn't equate Israel with the Nazi's, just said that a Palestinian woman reminded him of his mother in the Ghetto.

This tells us two things about the current situation.

1) The criticism by the Israeli government of his comments shows their reluctance to value a palestinian life in the same way they would a jewish one.

2) A ghetto is of course what most of the Palestinian people now live in. Palestinians territory has been sliced into pieces by Israeli roads and checkpoints, the result being that they live in small cantons, easily controlled by the Israeli army. Some Palestinians are living under a week long curfew, allowed out only for a few hours a week to get food and bare living essentials whilst Jewish settlers walk around with impugnity.

So no, history isn't repeating itself....yet. The number of Palestinian deaths hasn't been on the scale of the holocaust, but I dare say we could give it another ten or twenty years.

[Timber Loftis]

We will often fail to apply the lessons from history, IMO. We may "learn" them but when we are "in the moment" of a situation where they should be applied, we are highly unlikely to recognize it and adapt accordingly.

Yeah, I'm a cynical bugger.

[Black Baron]

An "incorrect" article to say the very least.

"and yeilded 1 tunnel". Bravo, ser "incorrect information". We found 3 tunnels already. Needles to say that since 3 is not 1, the rest of the article is one big lie. The author did not even bother to check out the facts!

http://news.walla.co.il/?w=//547595


There is lots of stuff there and about the tunnels too. Look at the "bold" underlined first paragraph. you will see the number 3 there.

Now about the post.

Hitler attacked at 22.61941. High summer, hardly any snow. [img]smile.gif[/img]


Israel is not rich at all. Believe me, i should know. We are rather poor.

When Hitler had refugee camps that non german or their allies dwelt there?

The situation is different, you said it yourself.
We do it because these little ************* smuggle katiushas, rpgs and whatnot. Did you ever live in a state or a city when each day without getting down to basement was a extraordinary one? We cannot brook such a situation. We destroy these homes because we have to, not because we want to and not because we enjoy it. If they did not smuggle weapons or fought the smugglers, then their homes could be intact by now.

[Thoran]

I just don't see history repeating when comparing Israel/Palesine with Hitlers Germany... if the Jews of 1930's europe had been suicide bombing the wazoo out of Hitler's folks and Adolf had to stuff them into camps to keep them from killing his people, well I guess then it'd be closer to a valid comparison.

[ 05-24-2004, 04:55 PM: Message edited by: Thoran ]

[Faceman]

Originally posted by Black Baron: Needless to say that since 3 is not 1, the rest of the article is one big lie.

Sharp conclusion!

Originally posted by Black Baron: http://news.walla.co.il/?w=//547595

You're wrong, here's my proof www.sohu.com

Originally posted by Black Baron: There is lots of stuff there and about the tunnels too. Look at the "bold" underlined first paragraph. you will see the number 3 there.

חייל ברפיח. "שן קשת ענן" (צילום: רויטרס)צה"ל: במבצע "קשת בענן" נהרגו 41 מחבלים
ו-12 אזרחים, נהרסו 56 בתים ואותרו 3 מנהרות להברחת נשק


Wow, there IS something I can read. It's a "3". It could be 3 apples, 3 fighter planes or 3 dictionaries, but there are most certainly three of them.


Now about the post:

I think it's rude to prove your point by linking a page most of the IWF members and very possibly none of the posters on this thread (save you) understands. I almost never link pages in German and that's at least the same script. I cannot even guess what's in this article and so I feel a bit puzzled.

Disproving an article is not as simple as finding one wrong number and automatically assuming everything else is wrong too.

Of course it's a poor comparison and this can be proven quite easily by debating calmly.
The main problem with large-scale wars or military actions risking civilian collaterals is obvious.
For every terrorist you catch you incite two new ones.
You may stop the weapon smugglers today but if you destroy some homes in the course you've just made the most effective PR for every terrorist in the area and doubled their numbers tomorrow.

[Timber Loftis]

For every terrorist you catch you incite two new ones. You may stop the weapon smugglers today but if you destroy some homes in the course you've just made the most effective PR for every terrorist in the area and doubled their numbers tomorrow.

I'm a little bored and a little sick of hearing this argument. It is nothing more than an excuse to do nothing. If you kill terrorists and their sympathizers, you will eventually get them all. If along the way, all Palestinians become terrorist based on the reasoning you state above, then the equation simply becomes one where killing all the terrorists also equals killing all the Palestinians. If that is their choice, so be it. But it is wrong to cowtow to terrorists. There is only one right answer -- overwhelming and brutal reactionary force in opposition to any terrorist activity.

MY OPINION.

[Faceman]

Terrorists are criminals. Period.
If I want to catch criminals I use the police and not the army. For a simple reason, to avoid doing more damage while catching the criminal than he poses a danger in the first place.
Extreme example:
Crime rates in LA are high and my fellow countryman Arnold, aka The Terminator , decides to do something about it. He starts bulldozing districts with high crime rates using tanks thus killing a lot of criminals. In the course of this destruction a lot of innocent people (also from neighbouring districts) lose their homes and fall below the poverty line. Some of them become criminals (some for the money they lack, some because they now hold a grudge against society). So Arnie starts taking out mob bosses with Apache helicopters thus eliminating them but also destroying more homes and killing innocent people. LA citizens begin to riot. Arnie orders firing in the crowd ... and eventually carpet bombs LA.
facit:
problem solved - mission accomplished
of the millions of dead people some already had it coming (they were criminals from the start) some made a wrong choice (the became criminal in the course of events) and some wer completely innocent all the way.
In addition to the lives lost there's also a lot of economical potential going to hell, etc.

Now I know this is over the top (that's just my cynical self ) but the bottom line is "violence breeds violence"
There's a reason they don't teach recruits how to become "Dirty Harry" or "John McLane" in police academy and it's not about ethics, but about effiency and law.
A hand-grenade is not an appropriate weapon for self-defence, a gun is.
I'm not saying do nothing, but respond appropriately in the manner of a country with a modern and working justice system.
my 2c

[ 05-24-2004, 06:02 PM: Message edited by: Faceman ]

[Timber Loftis]

I disagree. When a "criminal" is sporting RPGs and bombs, you call in the National Guard, just like they did to poor Johnnie Rambo in the backwoods of Kentucky. Besides, if you look to SWAT and other types of police responses appropriate for terrorist situations, I think you'll find that you're splitting hairs and that there's little difference.

[Faceman]

SWAT is an excellent example of using (para)military resources while acting as a exceptionally trained police force. When have you last seen SWAT use a mortar in a hostage situation?
The point is to respond accordingly to the threat and the situation.
If there's some loonie on the lose driving a tank of course they'll call the national guard and use anti-tank launchers if the situation requires it.
If the same loonie however has exited the tank and retreated to the woods or escaped to a safehouse there's no more need for anti-tank weaponry and SWAT will go in with MP5s and M3s instead of LAWs and air support from AH64s.
It's not only safer for the public, but also more cost-effective

One thing that extremely bothered me with the Israeli approach has always been the assassination of confirmed but not convicted terrorist leaders (especially when done with combat helicopters).

Ask yourself: "Would Chicago (and the US) have been better off if Al Capone had been shelled with artillery at his estate or during an opera visit?"

[ 05-24-2004, 06:33 PM: Message edited by: Faceman ]