|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:39 pm Post subject: Re: Zionism vs Hezbollah |
 |
|
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
[Unlike a traditional guerrilla force, however, Hezbollah emphasized holding territory and digging in to bunkers, instead of the usual tactic of hiding among civilian populations. Likewise, the militant organization's discipline and coordination highly resembled those of conventional armies.
. |
Let's just change the bolding slightly and see how that looks...ah yes that's more like it.
Should a guerrilla force whose usual tactic is hiding among civilian populations be lauded for choosing to fight more conventionally ON ONE OCCASION? Nor have they said that they intend to fight this way from on now instead of hiding behind civilians.
I'm going to go with "No" on this one |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 7:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
| ...the indisputable reality. |
I see no such thing, In_Seoul_2003. I leave that to N. Chomsky and others on the far left.
Rather, in this case, I see this:
(a) The government of Israel and its backers, including the American government, envision a set of relations that project a Jewish nation-state at the expense of marginalizing Palestinians from an area Arabs -- I believe, off the top of my head, it was the Umayyads -- long ago took by conquest. They aggressively asserted Islam in opposition to the preexisting Jews and Christians there, believing that their religion and imperial state superceded all others. Nevertheless, the current set of relations, because it remains exclusionary, remains a problem many of us agree we should address equitably.
(b) The government of Lebanon and its backers envision a set of relations where they govern Lebanese affairs. This vision leaves no room for foreign-sponsored claimants, namely your Hezbollah.
(c) The governments of Iran, Syria, and Palestine, especially elements such as Hamas, envision a set of relations premised on the destruction of the Jewish nation-state. This remains, in turn, premised on implied claims that naturalize the earlier Arab conquests through Syria and Egypt -- not unlike some Mexican nationalist historians who self-righteously claim that Mexico had naturally inherited the American Southwest from imperial Spain, which in turn had ancient and peaceful claims upon said lands...
The rest bores me, especially the part where your spin constantly probes for new and improved ways of naturalizing, indeed glorifying and romanticizing the third set of claims, especially falling for Hezbollah's intended effect re: the Israelis' hitting civilian targets "for no reason except they are cruel," etc., all the while self-righteously attacking the first two. And that is all I have to say re: this thread and this impasse.
Again, In_Seoul_2003, thus the continuing war. And at the end of the day, our side -- which includes the Obama Administration, I remind you -- is far better armed than and just as committed to seeing this through as yours. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
in_seoul_2003
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Also highlighted is the conventional status of Hezbollah's military tactics that DID NOT invlove hiding among civilian populations. |
| Quote: |
| Unlike a traditional guerrilla force, however, Hezbollah emphasized holding territory and digging in to bunkers, instead of the usual tactic of hiding among civilian populations |
"Didn't emphasize" doesn't equal " did not involve" or "didn't do"
Today the college football team from Seoul emphazied a short passing game to win however they did throw quite a few long passes too. However their most effective tactic was the short passing game. |
Again, I repeat to you what I already said to Gopher: obviously, had the Hezballah employed conventional war tactics as brief or marginal to an otherwise more dominant tactic of hiding among civilians then THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO NEED TO WRITE THE ARTICLE AND LEARN FROM WHAT THEY WERE DOING!!!
It would have sufficed for them to say, "Yeah, they fought conventionally here and there but for the most part they were doing the same old guerilla warfare thing." Making the article, and the invocation to learn from them that goes with it, completely non-sensical.
I hate to say it, but duh? |
It does not say that they empahasized on tactic not that they didn't do another.
It did not say that they avoided doing such and such.
Conventional gurrilla armies don't fight from bunkers but Hizzbollah emphased such a tactic and they didn't emphasize fighting from residential areas it didn't say that they didn't fight from civilian areas.
| Quote: |
| Unlike a traditional guerrilla force, however, Hezbollah emphasized holding territory and digging in to bunkers, instead of the usual tactic of hiding among civilian populations |
Last question where were the bunkers located? |
Well, UNLIKE traditional guerilla forces, not in civilian areas. You don't think they would deem it worthy to write an article warning of Hezballah's conventional tactics by asserting that they were holding bunkers AMIDST civilian populations do you? Wouldn't that make the article pointless?
Joo, you've been on Daves a long time, since 2002 at least. It's time for you to call me in_seoul_1933 and let it go because you're points are going nowhere fast, yeah? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
in_seoul_2003
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:26 pm Post subject: Re: Zionism vs Hezbollah |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
[Unlike a traditional guerrilla force, however, Hezbollah emphasized holding territory and digging in to bunkers, instead of the usual tactic of hiding among civilian populations. Likewise, the militant organization's discipline and coordination highly resembled those of conventional armies.
. |
Let's just change the bolding slightly and see how that looks...ah yes that's more like it.
Should a guerrilla force whose usual tactic is hiding among civilian populations be lauded for choosing to fight more conventionally ON ONE OCCASION? Nor have they said that they intend to fight this way from on now instead of hiding behind civilians.
I'm going to go with "No" on this one |
I could care less if you find it laudable or not, that's not the point. The point is, however, about problematizing a few misconceptions about what happened in July of 2006. That was stated clearly on the first page. Pay attention. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
in_seoul_2003
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Gopher wrote: |
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
| ...the indisputable reality. |
I see no such thing, In_Seoul_2003. I leave that to N. Chomsky and others on the far left.
Rather, in this case, I see this: |
Ah yes! You've managed to deter attention from where you were realy going in your last post: guilt by association, no?
Wasn't it you who implied distaste for guilt by association in the Palin thread here:
http://forums.eslcafe.com/korea/viewtopic.php?t=132543&start=1305&sid=5f43dbdee61bac8d925d09d5bf367e5c
In your last post on this thread to me clearly you were taking my use of "Zionism" and it's associations to Tehran, Syria, and the Hezballah and, wait, can you hear it?, barely audible: "GUILT BY ASSOCIATION!"
Of course, my point to you was that employing "zionist" not only precedes anything out of Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, but exceeds it in so far as they alone cannot lay claim to how it is used, even though they don't always use it in a particularly bad way.
I'm not looking for a history lesson. You clearly have your books and I have my own. I will however comment on this because it poignantly demonstrates your unwillingness to learn about the region before passing off so much unequivocal 'knowledge':
| Quote: |
| (b) The government of Lebanon and its backers envision a set of relations where they govern Lebanese affairs. This vision leaves no room for foreign-sponsored claimants, namely your Hezbollah. |
The "government of Lebanon"? As opposed to Hezballah? Do you know that Shiite muslims comprise one third of the Lebanese government, most of whom support the Hezballah? Which government, then, are you talking about? The Christian Marronite government? The historically French backed government?
Furthermore, what idealized Lebanese government are you referring to? Do you understand that this "government" of yours has a violence all its own? Furthermore, are you aware of its implosions? Afterall, it isn't without consequence that your "Lebanese government" has caused General Aoun (a Christian--a very high level Christian) to turn away in disgust and side with Nasrallah (leader of the Hezballah).
Learn your Lebanese before passing off such weak statements!
Edit: This deserves a double take even though I shouldn't be surprised. With that comment you just demonstrated your unwillingness to learn anything about the region you're commenting on! For shame, man, for shame!
Last edited by in_seoul_2003 on Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:58 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 9:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="in_seoul_2003"]
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Also highlighted is the conventional status of Hezbollah's military tactics that DID NOT invlove hiding among civilian populations. |
| Quote: |
| Unlike a traditional guerrilla force, however, Hezbollah emphasized holding territory and digging in to bunkers, instead of the usual tactic of hiding among civilian populations |
"Didn't emphasize" doesn't equal " did not involve" or "didn't do"
Today the college football team from Seoul emphazied a short passing game to win however they did throw quite a few long passes too. However their most effective tactic was the short passing game. |
Again, I repeat to you what I already said to Gopher: obviously, had the Hezballah employed conventional war tactics as brief or marginal to an otherwise more dominant tactic of hiding among civilians then THERE WOULD HAVE BEEN NO NEED TO WRITE THE ARTICLE AND LEARN FROM WHAT THEY WERE DOING!!!
It would have sufficed for them to say, "Yeah, they fought conventionally here and there but for the most part they were doing the same old guerilla warfare thing." Making the article, and the invocation to learn from them that goes with it, completely non-sensical.
I hate to say it, but duh? |
It does not say that they empahasized on tactic not that they didn't do another.
It did not say that they avoided doing such and such.
Conventional gurrilla armies don't fight from bunkers but Hizzbollah emphased such a tactic and they didn't emphasize fighting from residential areas it didn't say that they didn't fight from civilian areas.
| Quote: |
| Unlike a traditional guerrilla force, however, Hezbollah emphasized holding territory and digging in to bunkers, instead of the usual tactic of hiding among civilian populations |
Last question where were the bunkers located? |
| Quote: |
| Well, UNLIKE traditional guerilla forces, not in civilian areas. You don't think they would deem it worthy to write an article warning of Hezballah's conventional tactics by asserting that they were holding bunkers AMIDST civilian populations do you? Wouldn't that make the article pointless? |
Where does it say that? More than that the article didn't not say where the bunkers were nor that they avoided making use of civilian areas.
| Quote: |
| Unlike a traditional guerrilla force, however, Hezbollah emphasized holding territory and digging in to bunkers, instead of the usual tactic of hiding among civilian populations |
| Quote: |
| Joo, you've been on Daves a long time, since 2002 at least. It's time for you to call me in_seoul_1933 and let it go because you're points are going nowhere fast, yeah? |
Well the name does fit you and your opinon is just that but wait and see. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
in_seoul_2003
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
^^^ You just changed your last sentence entirely. Before it said "No, and the name still stands."
Why the change? Why the insecurity in what you wrote? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
^^^ You just changed your last sentence entirely. Before it said "No, and the name still stands."
Why the change? Why the insecurity in what you wrote? |
what editing now is just 4 you? U are desperate aren't you?
You roar big but when it comes to the facts you melt. This time too. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
in_seoul_2003
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| You roar big but when it comes to the facts you melt. |
Christ, Joo, this is a little dramatic, no? It's not a Hollywood script. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 10:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I'd much rather that all Israelis move to the US.
I don't think any theocracy should stand.
Seriously that the Jews made something of the cesspit
that is the middle east is commendable especially
against such adversity.
What would it cost to move all the Israelis to Iowa or Nevada or Arizona?
They could create all the settlements they want.
Palestine would continue to be one giant refugee camp.
As far as the OP goes, it is just pretending to hold a position in an
argument when you misuse phrase from a report that was misused by a
journalist at a newspaper for a completely different misuse than the
misuse that you use. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
in_seoul_2003
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 21, 2008 11:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Jandar wrote: |
| I'd much rather that all Israelis move to the US. |
Then they wouldn't be Isreali woud they?
| Quote: |
| I don't think any theocracy should stand. |
Like the 2000 year old biblical theocracy that justifies Isreal's existence?
| Quote: |
Seriously that the Jews made something of the cesspit
that is the middle east is commendable especially
against such adversity. |
At least you admit it was a cesspool and not a desert full of rattlesnakes!
| Quote: |
| What would it cost to move all the Israelis to Iowa or Nevada or Arizona? |
About a couple million dead Indians turning over in the graves that White people put them in.
| Quote: |
| They could create all the settlements they want. |
Why not? Afterall, Zionists making something of the "desert" plays quite nicely with America's success at subduing the "wilderness".
| Quote: |
| Palestine would continue to be one giant refugee camp. |
Palestinians or "Injins"?
| Quote: |
As far as the OP goes, it is just pretending to hold a position in an argument when you misuse phrase from a report that was misused by a journalist at a newspaper for a completely different misuse than the
misuse that you use. |
That's Mr. to you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 12:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
Didn't Israelis enemies side with the Nazis?
War Crime.
Didn't they launch a war of Annihilation in 1948? In which even arab jews would have been expelled or killed?
War Crime / Attempted War Crime
Don't Israel's enemies persecute their minorities?
Crime
Didn't they persecuted their arab jews in retaliation for Israel?
Crime.
Of course some have no problem with any of the above. Oh well selective one sided criticism.
Here is a good argument for Israel cause Bathists , Khomeni followers and Al Qaedists and all those of a similar ideological persuassion can't be trusted to protect their minorites or govern.
Zionism is a bad idea but it is a lot better than Bathism , Khomenism , Al Qaedism or Nasserism or any of the similar stuff. Those ideologies ought to be done away with. Let Israel's enemies accept liberal democracy first.
Remember Al Qaedists , Khomeni followers and Bathists are all fascist bigots.
| Quote: |
| If they (Jews) all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide. (Daily Star, Oct. 23, 2002) |
Hassan Nasrallah
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Mon Dec 22, 2008 5:54 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 2:53 am Post subject: Re: Zionism vs Hezbollah |
|
|
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
[Unlike a traditional guerrilla force, however, Hezbollah emphasized holding territory and digging in to bunkers, instead of the usual tactic of hiding among civilian populations. Likewise, the militant organization's discipline and coordination highly resembled those of conventional armies.
. |
Let's just change the bolding slightly and see how that looks...ah yes that's more like it.
Should a guerrilla force whose usual tactic is hiding among civilian populations be lauded for choosing to fight more conventionally ON ONE OCCASION? Nor have they said that they intend to fight this way from on now instead of hiding behind civilians.
I'm going to go with "No" on this one |
I could care less if you find it laudable or not, that's not the point. The point is, however, about problematizing a few misconceptions about what happened in July of 2006. That was stated clearly on the first page. Pay attention. |
No, the point is that Hezbollah is a terrorist group which have not renounced the use of civilians as human shields. Until they do, they deserve no recognizion of any kind. Period.
And the ONLY and SOLE reason they performed so well, is that Israel was holding back in order to reduce civilian causualties. Had Israel decided to go all out, Hezbollah would be in much much worse shape then it is today. Remember that after the war there was a lot of bitterness felt. not only towards Israel, but also Hezbollah for provoking it in the first place. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
in_seoul_2003
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 9:55 am Post subject: Re: Zionism vs Hezbollah |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| in_seoul_2003 wrote: |
[Unlike a traditional guerrilla force, however, Hezbollah emphasized holding territory and digging in to bunkers, instead of the usual tactic of hiding among civilian populations. Likewise, the militant organization's discipline and coordination highly resembled those of conventional armies.
. |
Let's just change the bolding slightly and see how that looks...ah yes that's more like it.
Should a guerrilla force whose usual tactic is hiding among civilian populations be lauded for choosing to fight more conventionally ON ONE OCCASION? Nor have they said that they intend to fight this way from on now instead of hiding behind civilians.
I'm going to go with "No" on this one |
I could care less if you find it laudable or not, that's not the point. The point is, however, about problematizing a few misconceptions about what happened in July of 2006. That was stated clearly on the first page. Pay attention. |
No, the point is that Hezbollah is a terrorist group which have not renounced the use of civilians as human shields. Until they do, they deserve no recognizion of any kind. Period.
And the ONLY and SOLE reason they performed so well, is that Israel was holding back in order to reduce civilian causualties. Had Israel decided to go all out, Hezbollah would be in much much worse shape then it is today. Remember that after the war there was a lot of bitterness felt. not only towards Israel, but also Hezbollah for provoking it in the first place. |
Again, and for the last time, I DON"T CARE about your terrorist, your recognition, and your boys with military toys lingo.
I care about the implications of the article in relation to 2006, what happened in that war, and how it was perceived.
Take a cue from the people who wrote it and the organization which published it. At least they were able to distance themselves enough from the object of their analysis - Hezballah, whom they hold in contempt - to recognize what happaned in that war. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
in_seoul_2003
Joined: 24 Nov 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Didn't Israelis enemies side with the Nazis? |
Perhaps, in the context of their contempt for what Zionism was doing in Jerusalem. But what was Zionism's excuse for siding with Nazis?
| Quote: |
| Didn't they launch a war of Annihilation in 1948? In which even arab jews would have been expelled or killed? |
Did Annihilation begin in 1948? Is that what you are suggesting?
| Quote: |
| Don't Israel's enemies persecute their minorities? |
Arabs? Regrettably, yes, some of them do, very badly. Have Palestinians forcibly become minorities in their own lands?
| Quote: |
| Didn't they persecuted their arab jews in retaliation for Israel? |
No. Enough books have discredited the way Zionism has narrated the persecution of Arab Jewry. This, of course, would be the same Zionism that were complicit in sending Jews to gas chambers.
| Quote: |
| Here is a good argument for Israel cause Bathists , Khomeni followers and Al Qaedists and all those of a similar ideological persuassion can't be trusted to protect their minorites or govern. |
This is not only unintelligible, it's religiously and geo-politically unintelligible.
| Quote: |
| Zionism is a bad idea but it is a lot better than Bathism , Khomenism , Al Qaedism or Nasserism or any of the similar stuff. Those ideologies ought to be done away with. Let Israel's enemies accept liberal democracy first. |
This is why I like you - and these moments are few and far between. And why ultimately you are probably more reasonable than most people on this board even though you are still wrong (you can't understand, for example, Khomeiniism, without Zionism and vice versa).
| Quote: |
If they (Jews) all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide. (Daily Star, Oct. 23, 2002)
Hassan Nasrallah |
Yet everytime I go into the archives to get quotes from Zionists and American presidents I'm always accused of sensationalizing backroom chatter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
