What gives?

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:
Haim

Before you go wading in accusing people of being ignorant, a few points.


Mike

Mike,

The word is not "ignorant" but "arrogant". Erik and you sitting in the UK, trying to decide what describes Israel better "Nazi" or "Fascist" and that is in a context of UN resolutions being ignored. What a brain storm.

Back to your points:

1. So it is the UK and not England (excuse my ignorance) but do not change the subject on me. We are not talking about GW 1 but GW 2 that is totally unjustified and is happening now.

2. Osirik means a perfect real WMD threat that was precisely identified and taken out without causing any innocent civilian casualties or invading Iraq. I guess that this is something that is beyond the capacity of the US and the UK. Without this Israeli (Fascist?) operation Sadam would bee still sitting in Kuwait now, armed with nuclear weapons. Gw 1 & GW 2 could have not taken place.

3. Mike, what happened to the high standard you measured Israel against? Now that you are talking about the UK and the US you are lowering yourself to Sadam's level: We are no worse than he is so 30,000 dead are acceptable? That was the precise point of my first post.

Moving on.

I can understand that Erik being married to a Palestinian woman would be more exposed and sympathetic to the Palestinians cause and sufferings. Calling Israel "Nazi" (that even put you on guard) I do not understand nor appreciate, to put it mildly.

A point about the 18%. Lately, in a discussion about the future peace agreement and the creation of an Independent Palestinian State the possibility of a territory swap was raised. All the Israeli Arab villages mentioned to be transferred with their land to a free Palestinian state opposed the idea strongly (through their Arab representitives in the Kneset). I guess, Mike, that you will have to send your dictionary to them and explain to them the word "Apartheid" and perhaps they might explain to you why they rather be part of that Apartheid than be a part of a free Palestinian state.

I wonder why you are telling me that you are not anti-Semitic or Erik telling me about his Jewish friends. I am just having a political discussion with you and trying to get you down of your very high horse while talking about Israel and your very low horse while talking about the UK.

Regards,

Haim

Mike (TMP), you continue to shove your opinions or whatever you choose to call it. It is arrogant to think that what you have read is the truth of what really happened or worse would have happened, a big guess. The projected lives saved by ending the war early using the atomic bombs, range from under one hundred thousand to 1 million. A large range by my reckoning, so it is just a guess based on assumption. Just assumptions by all accounts.

There is more to any issue than you can read (you may think you have read all there is). Only a fool will think that they have learned everything there is from their reading alone. You are looking at things from your perspective alone, just your perspective. Not the truths like you seem to insist.

quote:

Originally posted by HR:

Erik and you sitting in the UK, trying to decide what describes Israel better "Nazi" or "Fascist" and that is in a context of UN resolutions being ignored. What a brain storm.

Why shouldn't we, we live in a free democracy not a police state like Israel.

quote:

I can understand that Erik being married to a Palestinian woman would be more exposed and sympathetic to the Palestinians cause and sufferings. Calling Israel "Nazi" (that even put you on guard) I do not understand nor appreciate, to put it mildly.

My ex-wife is Lebanese. Her parents are Palestian by birth. Yes, I was exposed to the Palestinian cause as few are, the average American and average Brit no virtually nothing of Israeli atrocity against the Palestians, however, as I have pointed out before, I do not take sides as both sides have done great wrong to the other. I explained why I call Israel Nazi, it is because of the deeply held view that they are the chosen people in the promised land and that their holocaust against the Palestians in justified in the eyes of God. Their treetment of the Palestians is not so different from the Nazi treetment of Jews in Europe. If you think the words Nazi and holocaust are innapropriate you may like to read The Israeli Holocaust Against the Palestinians. Just google 'israeli atrocity against the Palestians'or similar and take a quick glance at the hundreds of websites many of which are compiled by Jews so don't think I'm being fooled by Arab propaganda. If only half of what you read is true it will shock you.

quote:

I wonder why you are telling me that you are not anti-Semitic or Erik telling me about his Jewish friends.

I believe I explained why I mentioned this.

Regards,

Erik

Hi Haim!
I think that Erik is right when he writes that israeli Jews use nazi methods.
It's not a matter of anti-semitism.
It's only a matter of considering the facts.
Sometimes the victims of persecution become tormentors.

Ciao
Gianluigi

Below are some things which the general public may not know. It is not meant to be exhaustive (too much for a post here). Apologies to those who find it too long.


July 1945 - Japan's intercepted messages:

Messages from Foreign Minister Togo to Japan's Ambassador to Moscow Sato, intercepted and read by the U.S. at the time.

July 11: "make clear to Russia... We have no intention of annexing or taking possession of the areas which we have been occupying as a result of the war; we hope to terminate the war".

July 12: "it is His Majesty's heart's desire to see the swift termination of the war".

July 13: "I sent Ando, Director of the Bureau of Political Affairs to communicate to the [Soviet] Ambassador that His Majesty desired to dispatch Prince Konoye as special envoy, carrying with him the personal letter of His Majesty stating the Imperial wish to end the war" (see: U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 1, pg. 873-879).

July 18: "Negotiations... necessary... for soliciting Russia's good offices in concluding the war and also in improving the basis for negotiations with England and America." (Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 22: "Special Envoy Konoye's mission will be in obedience to the Imperial Will. He will request assistance in bringing about an end to the war through the good offices of the Soviet Government." The July 21st communication from Togo also noted that a conference between the Emperor's emissary, Prince Konoye, and the Soviet Union, was sought, in preparation for contacting the U.S. and Great Britain (Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).

July 25: "it is impossible to accept unconditional surrender under any circumstances, but we should like to communicate to the other party through appropriate channels that we have no objection to a peace based on the Atlantic Charter." (U.S. Dept. of State, Potsdam 2, pg. 1260 - 1261).

July 26: Japan's Ambassador to Moscow, Sato, to the Soviet Acting Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Lozovsky: "The aim of the Japanese Government with regard to Prince Konoye's mission is to enlist the good offices of the Soviet Government in order to end the war." (Records of the National Security Agency, Magic Files, RG 457, Box 18, National Archives).


These are some of the reasons why I say the atomic bombing should not have occurred. There are others and more not covered here (just a snippet, for now).

Well the fact is the bombs were detonated and civilians vaporised. What is disputed is whether it was necessary, to bring about Japans surrender. Japan knew it was defeated, just that they would loose face with unconditional surrender, yet it was insisted upon in the Potsdam Proclamation. Furthermore there was no guarantee that the monarchy will be spared after Japan’s surrender. The monarch is regarded as a God to the people of Japan and still regarded so. Hence this may explain the slow and complicated process of surrender. Only few hardcore Japanese leaders wanted to continue the war but they were the minority. I believe that, given time, with continued naval and air blockade and the threat of Russian invasion, Japan would eventually have surrendered. Alas, we will never know now. It is all academic from here on.

Excerpt:

Truman believed the use of atomic bombs on Japan was necessary primarily for the reasons he always gave: "We have used it in order to shorten the agony of war, in order to save the lives of thousands and thousands of young Americans" (Public Papers of the Presidents, Harry S. Truman, 1945, pg. 212).

He has been misled by my accounts.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

quote:

Originally posted by wellyspyder:
Mike (TMP), you continue to shove your opinions or whatever you choose to call it.

Resorting to insult indicates you feel unable to answer my points.

quote:

It is arrogant to think that what you have read is the truth of what really happened or worse would have happened, a big guess.

Unless you have some hidden knowledge not freely availble, then this comment can equally be said of you.

quote:

The projected lives saved by ending the war early using the atomic bombs, range from under one hundred thousand to 1 million. A large range by my reckoning, so it is just a guess based on assumption. Just assumptions by all accounts.

So if it only saved 100,000 lives then it was not worth it? I disagree.

quote:

There is more to any issue than you can read (you may think you have read all there is). Only a fool will think that they have learned everything there is from their reading alone. You are looking at things from your perspective alone, just your perspective. Not the truths like you seem to insist.

These comments apply equally to you.

This reply typifies your demeanour and attitude. For you it is not a debate but a chance to get on your high horse. I rest my case. You are not worth bothering with. Goodbye.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

quote:

Originally posted by wellyspyder:

This reply typifies your demeanour and attitude. For you it is not a debate but a chance to get on your high horse. I rest my case. You are not worth bothering with. Goodbye.

Like I say earlier, these comments apply equally to you.

Sorry if I've out-brained you.

Same for you

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:
I think its clear you feel the bomb should not have been dropped. I am also sure that the President of the US had taken advice in the issue.

Maybe but still the bomb fell and Japanese people suffered needlessly.

quote:

Shame that he was misled: if only you'd been there. But maybe you where?

It is not just my opinion:

"...in [July] 1945... Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. ...the Secretary, upon giving me the news of the successful bomb test in New Mexico, and of the plan for using it, asked for my reaction, apparently expecting a vigorous assent.

"During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives. It was my belief that Japan was, at that very moment, seeking some way to surrender with a minimum loss of 'face'. The Secretary was deeply perturbed by my attitude..."

- Dwight Eisenhower, Mandate For Change, pg. 380

Too bad.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

Shame that he was misled: if only you'd been there. But maybe you where?

Mockery but no content or point at all

More:

"Prof. Albert Einstein... said that he was sure that President Roosevelt would have forbidden the atomic bombing of Hiroshima had he been alive and that it was probably carried out to end the Pacific war before Russia could participate."

Einstein Deplores Use of Atom Bomb, New York Times, 8/19/46, pg. 1.


Even I would not say this but hey take what you may.

Something to consider about Truman's intention regarding the bombing of innocent Japanese people.

Truman reflected this feeling in a radio broadcast to the public on the night of Aug. 9, after an atomic bomb had been exploded upon the Nagasaki populace.

"Having found the bomb we have used it. We have used it against those who attacked us without warning at Pearl Harbor, against those who have starved and beaten and executed American prisoners of war, against those who have abandoned all pretense of obeying international laws of warfare" (Public Papers of the President, 1945, pg. 212).


Sadly, the vast majority of the people killed and injured by the atomic blasts at Hiroshima and Nagasaki did not fall into those categories.

Consider this also:

One of the earliest dissents came from a panel that had been requested by President Truman to study the Pacific war. Their report, The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, was issued in July 1946. It declared, "Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated." (Bernstein, ed., The Atomic Bomb, pg. 52-56).

So TMP where are thou?

For those who are still following, see this link for the chronology on decision to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki:

http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/key-issues/nuclear-wea...-bomb-chronology.htm

quote:

Originally posted by Gianluigi Mazzorana:
Hi Haim!
I think that Erik is right when he writes that israeli Jews use nazi methods.
It's not a matter of anti-semitism.
It's only a matter of considering the facts.
Sometimes the victims of persecution become tormentors.

Ciao
Gianluigi

Gianluigi my friend,

The Nazis used a lot of different methods and it is very easy to find some of those being used by other nations in different conflicts, including Isreal, France (in Algeria) and the US (in Viet Nam). For an extreme example, the Arabs in the 1948 war ethnicly cleansed all the territories they controlled, not allowing for even one Jew to stay, and burnt all their synagogues a la Krystalnacht. The Mufti of Jerusalem who planned the deportation (in the good case) of all the Jews when the German conquer Palestine, spent the War time in Berlin with Hitler and his entourage. I still do not call the Arabs Nazis.

What really defines Nazism ( AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT) is not the rounding and deportation of populations that was done in so many conflicts and by so many nations, but the Final Solution where millions of people were systematically exterminated. That is why I do not appreciate the free use of the word Nazi on anyone, including Israel as a whole.

Erik called the state of Israel 'Nazi' and I could not find in any of his posts the same use of term to describe anyone or anything else. On the other hand, when he is talking about American policies (that caused the deaths of 30000 people in Iraq) he is so careful to point out that he is 'against the creeps in power and not the whole country'. So we have a few creeps there (US) and a nation of Nazis here (Israel). That is what exactly I objected to.

Best regards,

Haim

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
Their treetment of the Palestians is not so different from the Nazi treetment of Jews in Europe.

Haim,

By this, I assume that Eric is referring to the Israelis rounding up millions of Palestinians for transportation to death camps, where they were stripped naked, gassed, had their gold fillings removed for melting down and were then cremated.

How can you call yourself an Israeli and yet be ignorant of these acts against the Palestinians?

Ciao dear Haim!
Yes.
I did made a mistake and i should have said that some israeli Jews think and act like nazis.
Mr. Sharon, just to take one, who covered himself of palestinian and lebanese blood in 1982.

To be more complete i do consider a nazi behaviour the american one against foreign population, the russian one in Chechnya, the chinese one even against their very citizens, the cuban etc etc
I do consider nazi any violent behaviour.
Only those who died in european camps during WW2 could tell us about violence, but we do forget that everywhere there's violence, overcoming, attack of civil rights and basic human beeing needs there's nazism.
So i do consider some israeli Jews like nazis and give no justification to their behaviour.
I'd like to say that when we talk about nazism we always think about deportation and extermination, but nazism is something more to my eyes.
The basic concept of nazi culture was the splitting of human race in categories.
We should not forget that in camps died i.e. homosexuals.
We should not forget that germans started killing all the disabled citizens because not worthy.
How many times do we see such iterpretation of life of other population in the world by other countries?


Shalom Haim!

Gianluigi

quote:

Originally posted by 7V:

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
Their treetment of the Palestians is not so different from the Nazi treetment of Jews in Europe.

Haim,

By this, I assume that Eric is referring to the Israelis rounding up millions of Palestinians for transportation to death camps, where they were stripped naked, gassed, had their gold fillings removed for melting down and were then cremated.

How can you call yourself an Israeli and yet be ignorant of these acts against the Palestinians?

It's best not to assume 7V. Making the wrong assumption makes one look very silly indeed.

quote:

Originally posted by 7V:

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
Their treetment of the Palestians is not so different from the Nazi treetment of Jews in Europe.

Haim,

By this, I assume that Eric is referring to the Israelis rounding up millions of Palestinians for transportation to death camps, where they were stripped naked, gassed, had their gold fillings removed for melting down and were then cremated.

How can you call yourself an Israeli and yet be ignorant of these acts against the Palestinians?

7V,

My ignorance has no boundries and some good souls on this forum are graciously using their dictionary to enlighten me. I am still learning.

Regards,

Haim

quote:

Originally posted by HR:

quote:

Originally posted by Gianluigi Mazzorana:
Hi Haim!
I think that Erik is right when he writes that israeli Jews use nazi methods.
It's not a matter of anti-semitism.
It's only a matter of considering the facts.
Sometimes the victims of persecution become tormentors.

Ciao
Gianluigi

Gianluigi my friend,

The Nazis used a lot of different methods and it is very easy to find some of those being used by other nations in different conflicts, including Isreal, France (in Algeria) and the US (in Viet Nam). For an extreme example, the Arabs in the 1948 war ethnicly cleansed all the territories they controlled, not allowing for even one Jew to stay, and burnt all their synagogues a la Krystalnacht. The Mufti of Jerusalem who planned the deportation (in the good case) of all the Jews when the German conquer Palestine, spent the War time in Berlin with Hitler and his entourage. I still do not call the Arabs Nazis.

What really defines Nazism ( AND EVERYONE KNOWS THAT) is not the rounding and deportation of populations that was done in so many conflicts and by so many nations, but the Final Solution where millions of people were systematically exterminated. That is why I do not appreciate the free use of the word Nazi on anyone, including Israel as a whole.

Erik called the state of Israel 'Nazi' and I could not find in any of his posts the same use of term to describe anyone or anything else. On the other hand, when he is talking about American policies (that caused the deaths of 30000 people in Iraq) he is so careful to point out that he is 'against the creeps in power and not the whole country'. So we have a few creeps there (US) and a nation of Nazis here (Israel). That is what exactly I objected to.

Best regards,

Haim

Yes the state of Israel is Nazi. I do not mean all Israelis are Nazis. The state of Israel is Nazi because significant elements (government, leading rabbis and the media) believe they are Gods chosen people occupying the promised land (which does not belong to them) at the expense of those deemed not to be the chosen people. This view pervades all levels of Israel government and life. They exercise one rule of law for them and another rule of law for the others. Yes, they have herded Palestians into ghettos as the Germans did and yes they have forced them out of their homes as the Germans did and yes they have denied them the means to make a living as the Germans did and yes they practiced vicious reprisals against innocent people as the Germans did and yes they murdered as the Germans did. The scale maybe different but that is all. They think they have God's blessing in this. Compare this to Nazi Germany where people were taught to believe in their own Aryan Supremacy and justification for persecuting a minority in the name of God and in the name of the Furher. The fact that millions of Jews were killed by German Nazis does not justify the persecution of a single Palestinian IMO. Israel uses what happened to the Jews in Nazi Germany as an excuse for it's own barbaric persecution of the Palestians and labels anyone who criticises their policies and actions as anti-semitic. The evidense for this is overwhelming but people on the whole are too gutless to stand up and say so.

Nazism is NOT defined by the final solution. German Nazis were Nazis way before the final solution was implemented or even planned. German Nazis were Nazis even before the persecution of the Jews started.

I am not sure I have ever referred to Israel as being a nation of Nazis. Israel is Nazi because it is government policy to be Nazi - calling the persecution of Palestians another name does not change the act. Refering to Nazi Israel is just shorthand in the same way as you or 7V might refer to Nazi germany, you would not say all Germans were Nazi would you? I am not labelling all Israelis or all Jews as Nazi nor would I ever do so.

There are elements within many governments which are nazi including America where the idea that God is on their side against Islam is increasingly prevalent IMO. Amercans genuinely seem to belive that the life of an American is more important, in God's scheme of things, than the life of an Iraqi or any Arab and I have said this before on threads here. I am against all kinds or persecution and all kinds of violence and all kinds of retaliation. The evidense is in my posts which can be tracked. I have not singled Israel out and I resent the accusation.

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
It's best not to assume 7V. Making the wrong assumption makes one look very silly indeed.

Rather very silly than pig-ignorant (at best).

quote:

Originally posted by 7V:

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
It's best not to assume 7V. Making the wrong assumption makes one look very silly indeed.

Rather very silly than pig-ignorant (at best).

If you would care to refute any of my comments then please do so, I am not incapeble of changing my mind. If I am pig-ignorant then it should be easy to demonstrate, so please go ahead. I will stand by my statement until such time as you can show me to be incorrect.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:
A study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7–4 million American casualties, including 400,000–800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan.

You said it: key assumption

quote:

Outside the government, well-informed civilians were also making guesses.

You said it again: guesses

quote:

Kyle Palmer, war correspondent for the Los Angeles Times, said half a million to a million Americans would die by the end of the war. Herbert Hoover, in memorandums submitted to Truman and Stimson, also estimated 500,000–1,000,000 fatalities, and were believed to be conservative estimates; but it is not known if Hoover discussed these specific figures in his meetings with Truman. The chief of the Army Operations division thought them "entirely too high" under "our present plan of campaign.

Could they then modify their campaign without using the atomic bomb? Come on, these are leaders, are they not?

quote:

Dropping the bomb saved at least half a million American ( plus Allied ) lives, and probably five million Japanese lives.

Big guess based on big assumptions, you'd said at the begining.

quote:

Like it or not, the bomb was dropped, Japan surrendered days later.

Still proves nothing, could be a mere timing. You will not say this if your family was vapourised, but then again you may.

quote:

Good to see that you are backing up your statements.

Like I say your demeanor (last remark) continues to be nothing but arrogant, patronising and immature.

For others who do not know what I mean see this thread:http://forums.naim-audio.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/58019385/m/3132952107/p/2

quote:

Originally posted by erik scothron:
If you would care to refute any of my comments then please do so, I am not incapeble of changing my mind. If I am pig-ignorant then it should be easy to demonstrate, so please go ahead. I will stand by my statement until such time as you can show me to be incorrect.

Eric, I have neither the time nor the inclination to act as your teacher or to go through the points that you've made refuting them one by one. There have been some terrible acts committed by the Israelis as well as the Arabs.

There is plenty of information available, including on the World Wide Web. Try to ensure, however, that you read accounts told by both sides before arriving at your conclusions. Compare the various accounts of the evacuation, forced or otherwise, of Israel by native Arabs with the parallel expulsions of Jews from their long time homes in Arab countries.

Misinformation is the name of the game here, as is quite clear from reading your posts on this thread and one of the greatest propoganda coups of the Arab side is to persuade many otherwise sane Westerners that the Israelis should be likened to the Nazis. In the light of the activities of their wartime leader, the Mufti of Jerusalem, that is beyond reprehensible.

quote:

Like I say your demeanor (last remark) continues to be nothing but arrogant, patronising and immature.

Pot and kettle spring to mind.

Admittedly an expression that is likely to become (if it is not already) politically incorrect.

Chris