1930s All Over Again ?

#3
"Our present generation too is on the brink of moral insanity. That has never been more evident than in the last three weeks, as the West has proven utterly unable to distinguish between an attacked democracy that seeks to strike back at terrorist combatants, and terrorist aggressors who seek to kill civilians."






The above extract from this misguided nonsense would be laughable if the situation was not so dire (23 farm workers slaughtered - with no apology or statement of regret, yesterday). The tyranny of the minority is here now. As sickeningly revealed in the Middle East, it's the US and Israel versus the rest of the world
 
#4
frenchperson said:
"Our present generation too is on the brink of moral insanity. That has never been more evident than in the last three weeks, as the West has proven utterly unable to distinguish between an attacked democracy that seeks to strike back at terrorist combatants, and terrorist aggressors who seek to kill civilians."






The above extract from this misguided nonsense would be laughable if the situation was not so dire (23 farm workers slaughtered - with no apology or statement of regret, yesterday). The tyranny of the minority is here now. As sickeningly revealed in the Middle East, it's the US and Israel versus the rest of the world
I liked this bit :)
There is no need to mention Europe, an entire continent now returning to the cowardice of the 1930s. Its cartoonists are terrified of offending Muslim sensibilities, so they now portray the Jews as Nazis, secure that no offended Israeli terrorist might chop off their heads. The French foreign minister meets with the Iranians to show solidarity with the terrorists who promise to wipe Israel off the map (“In the region there is of course a country such as Iran — a great country, a great people and a great civilization which is respected and which plays a stabilizing role in the region”) — and manages to outdo Chamberlain at Munich. One wonders only whether the prime catalyst for such French debasement is worry over oil, terrorists, nukes, unassimilated Arab minorities at home, or the old Gallic Jew-hatred.
Got that spot on didn't he Frenchperson :oops:
 
#5
civpop42 said:
frenchperson said:
"Our present generation too is on the brink of moral insanity. That has never been more evident than in the last three weeks, as the West has proven utterly unable to distinguish between an attacked democracy that seeks to strike back at terrorist combatants, and terrorist aggressors who seek to kill civilians."






The above extract from this misguided nonsense would be laughable if the situation was not so dire (23 farm workers slaughtered - with no apology or statement of regret, yesterday). The tyranny of the minority is here now. As sickeningly revealed in the Middle East, it's the US and Israel versus the rest of the world
I liked this bit :)
There is no need to mention Europe, an entire continent now returning to the cowardice of the 1930s. Its cartoonists are terrified of offending Muslim sensibilities, so they now portray the Jews as Nazis, secure that no offended Israeli terrorist might chop off their heads. The French foreign minister meets with the Iranians to show solidarity with the terrorists who promise to wipe Israel off the map (“In the region there is of course a country such as Iran — a great country, a great people and a great civilization which is respected and which plays a stabilizing role in the region”) — and manages to outdo Chamberlain at Munich. One wonders only whether the prime catalyst for such French debasement is worry over oil, terrorists, nukes, unassimilated Arab minorities at home, or the old Gallic Jew-hatred.
Got that spot on didn't he Frenchperson :oops:
The author's being disingenuous, in that he knows the distinction between Jews and Zionists, however he's seeking to choose not to see the difference, and in true Mora style, to scream anti-Semitism. The French have strong links with Lebanon and are the only ones who seem to have genuine aims at stopping this Zionist slaughter (not Jewish slaughter, note)and ultimately putting a genuine buffer zone between innocent people and terror
 
#6
What percentage of the Israeli population support the current action. Is it something like 90%? Are they all Zionists?

Vichy france did help with the holocaust didn't it?
 
#7
So we're told, but I haven't been able to check the Israeli media to see what's allowed to be broadcast or published in this Middle East beacon of democracy
 
#8
I heard a really good interview on Radio 4 this morning from the home of an Israeli family who's politics were stated as Left wing. They saw the war from a viewpoint that they didn't want it but there was no other option.
I think 90% is probably right.

I forgot to mention the Dreyfuss affair with reguard to French Anti semetism.
 
#9
civpop42 said:
I heard a really good interview on Radio 4 this morning from the home of an Israeli family who's politics were stated as Left wing. They saw the war from a viewpoint that they didn't want it but there was no other option.
I think 90% is probably right.

I forgot to mention the Dreyfuss affair with reguard to French Anti semetism.
I didn't hear the interview, but I suppose it depends what the IT is. If IT means the deliberate targetting of civilians, does this fit in with we don't want it but there's no other option?
 
#10
Indeed it is. Let's just take the first paragraph shall we...

Victor Davis Hanson in NRO said:
When I used to read about the 1930s — the Italian invasion of Abyssinia, the rise of fascism in Italy, Spain, and Germany, the appeasement in France and Britain, the murderous duplicity of the Soviet Union, and the racist Japanese murdering in China — I never could quite figure out why, during those bleak years, Western Europeans and those in the United States did not speak out and condemn the growing madness, if only to defend the millennia-long promise of Western liberalism.
So there was "appeasement" in Britain was there? OK. So what was the US doing????

After September 1939, was Britain still appeasing? And just what was the US doing - oh yes, it was war profiteering amoungst other things.

Victor Davis Hanson in NRO said:
But nevertheless it is still surreal to reread the fantasies of Chamberlain, Daladier, and Pope Pius, or the stump speeches by Charles Lindbergh (“Their [the Jews’] greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government”) or Father Coughlin (“Many people are beginning to wonder whom they should fear most — the Roosevelt-Churchill combination or the Hitler-Mussolini combination.”) — and baffling to consider that such men ever had any influence.
Thank you Larry, you have confirmed again my belief in your desire to rewrite history as well as the future to suit your warped mind.

And one more thing. Wasn't it 1930s Nazi Germany that was accused of victimising a minority race simply claiming that they were a threat to society. Well mister, it seems that you and your kind seem to be pretty much instep with Nazi doctrine just rewrite Muslim for Jew and hey presto! ...
 
#11
frenchperson said:
civpop42 said:
I heard a really good interview on Radio 4 this morning from the home of an Israeli family who's politics were stated as Left wing. They saw the war from a viewpoint that they didn't want it but there was no other option.
I think 90% is probably right.

I forgot to mention the Dreyfuss affair with reguard to French Anti semetism.
I didn't hear the interview, but I suppose it depends what the IT is. If IT means the deliberate targetting of civilians, does this fit in with we don't want it but there's no other option?
I don't want to get into arguements with reguard to Isreal and their prosecution of the war. I am more interested in how the Islamists are fighting.

This piece I read today raises a good point about Hezbollahs tactics and how it has given the green light to human shield warfare.

The rules of war
 
#12
frenchperson said:
So we're told, but I haven't been able to check the Israeli media to see what's allowed to be broadcast or published in this Middle East beacon of democracy
FP - Look at Ha'aretz it is the left wing / liberal voice of Israeli media (although I suspect you would find it's views coming from the 'Zionist' state distasteful).

Zionism per se dissappeared 20 years ago. The political concept is not one highup in Israeli mindset. The days of 'stockade and tower' have gone. Your average Israeli never really talks about it in daily coffee shop political debate.

If anything, this latest round of hostilities has been a wake up call to Israel's left wing. Withdrawals do not guarantee an end hostilities.

Israel and France have had varying relations since 1967 when subsequent to the war, France withdrew it's support which had been strong and moved more towards the arabs. Over the course of modern history France has shown itself to be up there with the best of the anti-Semites. Dreyfuss being the most extreme political example (later exonerated), Vichy France, numerous (physical) attacks on Jews, statements by the French ambassador in 2000 (?), etc.
 
#13
Much as I dislike the French, I don't believe their stance derives from anti-semitism. As normal, the debate descends into allegations of racism (are the Jews a race, or a religion?) as soon as someone takes a stance against Israeli actions. Oh and dig up the Dreyfus case-1906 or so? Hardly indicative of modern French anti-semitism surely? Or does Oswald Moseley, a more recent example, tar the British as fascists?
 
#14
Northern Monkey said:
Much as I dislike the French, I don't believe their stance derives from anti-semitism. As normal, the debate descends into allegations of racism (are the Jews a race, or a religion?) as soon as someone takes a stance against Israeli actions. Oh and dig up the Dreyfus case-1906 or so? Hardly indicative of modern French anti-semitism surely? ...
Oddly enough,the Dreyfuss case propelled largely assimilated and secular Jews to look for other solutions to their non-acceptance into 'modern' societies. Thus, the modern political and secular movement of Zionism was born.

NM - France's negative stance towards Israel is borne out of many factors. Let me just say that they have shown certain (widespread) prejudices in very recent and longer term history, take that as you will.
 
#15
Arik-illustrate your point, instead of making sweeping assertions. In longer term history, as you put it, every western nation has illustrated prejudice to the Jews at some point? Does that automatically make them anti-semitic today?
Why do you term the French stance as negative towards Israel-surely calls for a ceasefire are a positive move?
 
#17
i wanted to dismiss the article as neo-con crap but it made a hell of a lot of sense and i cant disagree with much

apart from the part as already picked up on by merkator, if we were apeasing what were the yanks doing, the were activly supporting hitler untill bombs fell in their back yard.
 
#18
Northern Monkey said:
Arik-illustrate your point, instead of making sweeping assertions. ?
Apologies NM

Northern Monkey said:
In longer term history, as you put it, every western nation has illustrated prejudice to the Jews at some point? Does that automatically make them anti-semitic today? ?
These prejudices are a good reason for the existence of the State of Israel.
I would also comment that prejudices do not always dissapear, they have a tendency to re-surface. In the case of the French Jews, their immigration rate to Israel over the last few years has risen due to this fact.

Northern Monkey said:
Why do you term the French stance as negative towards Israel-surely calls for a ceasefire are a positive move?
A cease-fire will only work if Hezb are made dis-functional militarily. Otherwise the exercise will only delay an inevitable outbreak of fighting.
The French stance is commendable if there is no hidden agenda. But for a govt. that views Iran as having something worthwhile to add to such talks makes me question France's motives.
 
#19
Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Jack Straw make positive comments about Iran not so very long ago? Wasn't Syria being introduced back into the international fold up until recently. It's called politics Arik-what is said is not always what is meant.
Does it appear to you that Hezbollah is beaten at the moment? Is it just me that sees more kids, women etc being bombed and very little evidence of geurilla fighters being taken out? The Israeli action is apparently compounding the situation, not solving it.
 
#20
there are suggestions though monkey that a lot of the civilians being killed arn't actually civilians at all

there has been a lot of creative placements of bodies for propaganda means

and an emphysis on bodies of children rather than young men of fighting age, albeit from neo-con sources they have been proved by actual photographs and a time scale

whilst i hate seeing any civilians especially the young dead it has always been a problem in just about every war through history

as for apeasment, major news services like the BBc who are supposed to be giving un-biased repoting are extremly biased in thier reporting, meaning to get the correct middle of the road picture you have to look to look through neo-con trash to balance things up

their is a lack of moral courage in this country where people can not say the obvious, or suggest a solution to a problem, or even aknowledge that there is a problem with militant islam publicly without being branded as a racist

the muslim religion does not to me seem incompatable with the UK, but in its militant form the muslim religion is the cause of a lot of conflict throughout the globe, their is always an excuse or justification made by terrorist or apeasers but one constant fact remains, their are groups of muslim extemists througout the world involved in many conflicts who assign blame to everyone who is from a particular religion, country or ethnic group, be they man woman or child the are all guity and would all be beheaded given the chance, there are no half militants, no liberal militants, all muslim militants subscribe to the view that its ok to kill an innocent person because they are of a particular ethnic group or religion

areas can be grayed and misted over but the western world can in no way be considered the same in the way we conduct wars, whatever the crimes or percieved crimes of individuals
 

Latest Threads

Top