Israel... what do you think?

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

Once again, I'm so sorry I posted here.

First, my fact-based errors:
I did not intend to say that Judaism is a major world religion...
at least not by population...

It is a major influence on world religion because it is the root of both Christianity and Islam...
(Christianity is still the world's largest religion by population...
though Islam is now larger than Roman Catholicism.)

I'll take questions by PM...

Suffice it to say at least half the people who have replied to my last post or two:

1) didn't read it all the way ... try reading it aloud... it helps.

2) didn't comprehend fully it... see above suggestion...

3) exaggerated or extrapolated it's meaning far beyond what I intended...

4) didn't get their facts straight because they couldn't be bothered to spend 3 minutes on Google...

:: bans self from this topic. ::


Dear Mods and Admins,
If there is a way to prevent me from reading or posting to this topic again,
(short of crashing the Forums...), please enact it.

[[KMA]Avenger]

if any of us have misunderstood or jumped the gun the please put us straight. its no excuse to leave the topic simply because people jumped the gun. that's the cowards way out, and is also not the first nor the last time its ever happened in this part of the forum.

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

No... I left the topic because it degenerated further into name-calling and stereotypes...

Also because my posts that people had trouble with weren't very constructive anyway...

not a good use of my time to set people straight on my nearly worthless posts...

[[KMA]Avenger]

oh come on man, don't let it get to you. be bigger than that. i also left but couldn't stay away long because i realised this is a "discussion", and like all discussions there will be massively differing opinions, and you have to accept that fact. that doesn't mean we haver to take it personally and go getting all upset about it regardless of what others post. if there is a post in this thread you don't like then ignore it and move on.

if you was enjoying the thread prior to the last page then go back to the part you enjoyed and post on topic


i hope you stick around.

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

Well, since I already answered for Hitchkok on PM...

here's my attempt...
with many redundancies to emphasize the points that failed to get through the first time...

I say nuke the damn region until its uninhabitable. And guess what its not about the Israelis or Palestinians.

I've often had similar thoughts...

Don't forget to take Mecca with you.

Is it the right way to take care of problams ? violence ? if u think so your nothing better then terrorist .

Of course it's not the right way, but given the millennium after millennium of never-ending fighting and wars over this relatively small patch of desert that happens to be in the middle of 3 continents...

It's hard for people like myself whose dreams of world peace have died a terrible death not to wonder:

If we just nuked the holiest sites of the 3 major religions that seem to be at the root of the problem, maybe it would all be magically easier somehow...

but the Muslims, Christians and Jews would just fight endlessly ever after about whose fault it was that the place got nuked,
whose responsibility it is to clean it up,
and why the other side should go back to the stone age.
etc, etc, etc...

If nuking Israel / Palestine and/or the Middle East really would have brought about world peace that much quicker, someone probably would have done it by now

Well, tbh, I didn't both keeping track of who misunderstood what...

First note:
that both posts, and the one I was replying to were cynical and sarcastic,

And I said at the end,
if nuking Israel / Palestine would have likely brought about world peace much sooner,
chances are someone would have done it by now... if not Iran, perhaps the old Soviets... someone...

I fear a nuclear Iran, but it occurred to me just now that nuking Israel would have the effect of nuking Palestine, and that goes double for Jerusalem and the Dome of the Rock...

I said in my post that if we were going to go that route, that we should be sure to take Mecca with it... (at least one person forgot that line...)
though if I wanted to be fair, perhaps I should have added the Vatican... again, more cynicism and sarcasm...

The Holy Land is mostly desert, albeit at the crossroads of 3 continents and quite close to the world's first known historical records in Sumeria...
(think Basra, Iraq)...

and it does seem like way too many people on both sides have suffered and died
for a tiny piece of desert that most people wouldn't accept as a free gift
except because of it's location, and it's historical importance and relics...

a major nuclear detonation on Jerusalem would remove most of the remaining reasons that people keep fighting over the city... maybe even the country...

but as I said in my post, they'd find other reasons to fight... as I enumerated above...
thus rendering the practical application of such nuke irrelevant.

It's simply a case of frustration on my part...
and the person who started that train of thought... Dr. Phil... that I replied to at the top...


Dubby

waits for the fan mail...

[[KMA]Avenger]

glad you stuck around

[Dubby_CompGamerGeek2]

ty...

[Hitchkok]

Well, since I already answered for Hitchkok on PM...

here's my attempt...
with many redundancies to emphasize the points that failed to get through the first time...

I say nuke the damn region until its uninhabitable. And guess what its not about the Israelis or Palestinians.

I've often had similar thoughts...

Don't forget to take Mecca with you.

Is it the right way to take care of problams ? violence ? if u think so your nothing better then terrorist .

Of course it's not the right way, but given the millennium after millennium of never-ending fighting and wars over this relatively small patch of desert that happens to be in the middle of 3 continents...

It's hard for people like myself whose dreams of world peace have died a terrible death not to wonder:

If we just nuked the holiest sites of the 3 major religions that seem to be at the root of the problem, maybe it would all be magically easier somehow...

but the Muslims, Christians and Jews would just fight endlessly ever after about whose fault it was that the place got nuked,
whose responsibility it is to clean it up,
and why the other side should go back to the stone age.
etc, etc, etc...

If nuking Israel / Palestine and/or the Middle East really would have brought about world peace that much quicker, someone probably would have done it by now

Well, tbh, I didn't both keeping track of who misunderstood what...

First note:
that both posts, and the one I was replying to were cynical and sarcastic,

And I said at the end,
if nuking Israel / Palestine would have likely brought about world peace much sooner,
chances are someone would have done it by now... if not Iran, perhaps the old Soviets... someone...

I fear a nuclear Iran, but it occurred to me just now that nuking Israel would have the effect of nuking Palestine, and that goes double for Jerusalem and the Dome of the Rock...

I said in my post that if we were going to go that route, that we should be sure to take Mecca with it... (at least one person forgot that line...)
though if I wanted to be fair, perhaps I should have added the Vatican... again, more cynicism and sarcasm...

The Holy Land is mostly desert, albeit at the crossroads of 3 continents and quite close to the world's first known historical records in Sumeria...
(think Basra, Iraq)...

and it does seem like way too many people on both sides have suffered and died
for a tiny piece of desert that most people wouldn't accept as a free gift
except because of it's location, and it's historical importance and relics...

a major nuclear detonation on Jerusalem would remove most of the remaining reasons that people keep fighting over the city... maybe even the country...

but as I said in my post, they'd find other reasons to fight... as I enumerated above...
thus rendering the practical application of such nuke irrelevant.

It's simply a case of frustration on my part...
and the person who started that train of thought... Dr. Phil... that I replied to at the top...


Dubby

waits for the fan mail...

i would have to ask you to be less cryptic.
i appreaciete not wanting to kick over a bee-hive, but please spell out who misunderstood what part of your post and what was your original intention in the post.
else, you're effectively feeding the fire.

[Charisma]

This thread has gone way out of line.
Revisionist history is fine, but only if remarking upon it being revisionist is allowed.

Thank Heavens the ancient Greek are dead, because upon seeing the kind of reasoning in this thread, they'd collectively commit suicide.



So, referring to Semper's Rules for the GIDT, I am invoking my right to lock this thread. *closed*
Expressing opposing views is fine, but you've all crossed the line with this.
Consider yourselves lucky you do not get a warning, as would be fitting. Next time I will not be as lenient, consider this your first and final verbal warning.