Has the world no shame in what Israel is doing?

#101 Edited by dave123321 (34436 posts) -

You guys really need to stop your quote chains

Edit: Air and I are simpatico

#102 Posted by xdude85 (4643 posts) -

Israel and Palestine fighting is nothing new, I don't get why people are all bent out of shape because of this.

#103 Posted by AmazonTreeBoa (16745 posts) -

Why is it that the stupid are always the loudest and have the most to say all the while saying nothing at all?

#104 Posted by DaJuicyMan (3531 posts) -

@thegerg said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

I feel physically sick hearing "collateral damage". That is so disrespectful

How is it disrespectful?

Because it's an inaccurate label to what the act of "collateral damage" actually is - murder. To me, killing an enemy along with bystanders does not mean that the killing of those bystanders isn't murder.

#105 Posted by thegerg (16223 posts) -

@DaJuicyMan: Collateral damage is not an act. You seem to lack an understanding about that of which you are speaking.

#106 Posted by PsychoLemons (2500 posts) -

You are aware that they've been at it for years.

#107 Posted by watchdogsrules (510 posts) -

@TehFuneral: Israel is right at what their doing. you probably didn't hear the part where the reason Israel is defending themselves, Giza built secret tunnels to try and invade Israel, but Israel sniffed it out, fast, so Israel is right at what their doing, i think that you would have probably done the same.

#108 Edited by elkoldo (1619 posts) -
@dave123321 said:

You guys really need to stop your quote chains

Edit: Air and I are simpatico

As the core of the chain ,I was hurt more than anyone else ; I got 32 notifications none of which is really a reply to me.

#109 Edited by JimB (398 posts) -

@Flubbbs: Hamas is always getting a free pass. They are a terrorist group that hides behind women and children. They are the ones that start the conflict. They are cowards as soon as Israel gave Gaza as a homeland for the Palestinians, Hamas began attacking Israel with suicide bombers. Israel then built a wall to keep them out. Then Hamas started firing rockets in to Israel which has never stopped. When Israel defends its people fools who don't follow events run to blame Israel. I remember 911 the same people Israel is being scorned for killing were dancing in the streets, so forgive me if I have a hard time finding any sympathy.

#110 Posted by II_Seraphim_II (20514 posts) -

I just feel like in the Israeli Palestine conflict, the only people who want peace are the civilians....the respective governments of both nations want absolutely nothing to do with peace. Israeli government continues to support illegal settlements thus blocking any chance at peace, and HAMAS...well they just keep shooting at Israeli civilians, once again destroying any hope of peace. One could claim that since, the governments are democratically elected, they are a reflection of the people's will, but who knows? All I know is that neither government in the conflict is interested in peace, they want to wipe the other one out, the only thing stopping them is that genocide is frowned upon by the world.

#111 Edited by II_Seraphim_II (20514 posts) -

@JimB said:

@Flubbbs: Hamas is always getting a free pass. They are a terrorist group that hides behind women and children. They are the ones that start the conflict. They are cowards as soon as Israel gave Gaza as a homeland for the Palestinians, Hamas began attacking Israel with suicide bombers. Israel then built a wall to keep them out. Then Hamas started firing rockets in to Israel which has never stopped. When Israel defends its people fools who don't follow events run to blame Israel. I remember 911 the same people Israel is being scorned for killing were dancing in the streets, so forgive me if I have a hard time finding any sympathy.

The whole problem is that people are looking for an antagonist and a protagonist. There are no good guys in this conflict. You have 2 governments that would rather kill each other than make peace...which one is the worse evil is just a matter of personal opinion; both sides are wrong in this conflict. Unlike in the movies and in novels, sometimes in real life, everyone is just an asshole and there are no good guys.

#112 Posted by BossPerson (9130 posts) -

@thegerg said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

I feel physically sick hearing "collateral damage". That is so disrespectful

How is it disrespectful?

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them. Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, "I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so." Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:

"While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement."

The inflated style itself is a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. In our age there is no such thing as "keeping out of politics." All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer. I should expect to find -- this is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify -- that the German, Russian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the last ten or fifteen years, as a result of dictatorship.

-george orwell

#113 Edited by Flubbbs (3740 posts) -

@JimB said:

@Flubbbs: Hamas is always getting a free pass. They are a terrorist group that hides behind women and children. They are the ones that start the conflict. They are cowards as soon as Israel gave Gaza as a homeland for the Palestinians, Hamas began attacking Israel with suicide bombers. Israel then built a wall to keep them out. Then Hamas started firing rockets in to Israel which has never stopped. When Israel defends its people fools who don't follow events run to blame Israel. I remember 911 the same people Israel is being scorned for killing were dancing in the streets, so forgive me if I have a hard time finding any sympathy.

oh ok.. and yea apartheid state, which is what the walls are for

#114 Posted by sibu_xgamer (340 posts) -

@BossPerson said:

@thegerg said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

I feel physically sick hearing "collateral damage". That is so disrespectful

How is it disrespectful?

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them. Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, "I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so." Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:

"While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement."

The inflated style itself is a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. In our age there is no such thing as "keeping out of politics." All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer. I should expect to find -- this is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify -- that the German, Russian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the last ten or fifteen years, as a result of dictatorship.

-george orwell

Spot on George Orwell.

#115 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

@Flubbbs said:

@JimB said:

@Flubbbs: Hamas is always getting a free pass. They are a terrorist group that hides behind women and children. They are the ones that start the conflict. They are cowards as soon as Israel gave Gaza as a homeland for the Palestinians, Hamas began attacking Israel with suicide bombers. Israel then built a wall to keep them out. Then Hamas started firing rockets in to Israel which has never stopped. When Israel defends its people fools who don't follow events run to blame Israel. I remember 911 the same people Israel is being scorned for killing were dancing in the streets, so forgive me if I have a hard time finding any sympathy.

oh ok.. and yea apartheid state, which is what the walls are for

Are the neighboring Arab states guilty of apartheid as well?

#116 Posted by BossPerson (9130 posts) -

@-Sun_Tzu- said:

@Flubbbs said:

@JimB said:

@Flubbbs: Hamas is always getting a free pass. They are a terrorist group that hides behind women and children. They are the ones that start the conflict. They are cowards as soon as Israel gave Gaza as a homeland for the Palestinians, Hamas began attacking Israel with suicide bombers. Israel then built a wall to keep them out. Then Hamas started firing rockets in to Israel which has never stopped. When Israel defends its people fools who don't follow events run to blame Israel. I remember 911 the same people Israel is being scorned for killing were dancing in the streets, so forgive me if I have a hard time finding any sympathy.

oh ok.. and yea apartheid state, which is what the walls are for

Are the neighboring Arab states guilty of apartheid as well?

duh

#117 Posted by Treflis (11887 posts) -

To be perfectly honest, this has been going on at such lenght and again and again that you really have a hard time actually caring.

It is the same thing over and over again, they start fighting, the rest of the world tells them to stop and eventually they do for a period of time until they go at it again and we're telling them to stop again. At some point, they need to swallow pride, predjudice, malice and ego and actually make a genuine attempt to ensure lasting peace. It is obvious the rest of the world will not be able to do it for them.

#118 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

@BossPerson said:

@-Sun_Tzu- said:

@Flubbbs said:

@JimB said:

@Flubbbs: Hamas is always getting a free pass. They are a terrorist group that hides behind women and children. They are the ones that start the conflict. They are cowards as soon as Israel gave Gaza as a homeland for the Palestinians, Hamas began attacking Israel with suicide bombers. Israel then built a wall to keep them out. Then Hamas started firing rockets in to Israel which has never stopped. When Israel defends its people fools who don't follow events run to blame Israel. I remember 911 the same people Israel is being scorned for killing were dancing in the streets, so forgive me if I have a hard time finding any sympathy.

oh ok.. and yea apartheid state, which is what the walls are for

Are the neighboring Arab states guilty of apartheid as well?

duh

I agree.

#119 Posted by chocolate234 (25 posts) -

Lebanon bans Palestinians from many professions, Syria denied them citizenship and recently starved a refugee camp. Kuwait expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians after the Gulf War. Iraq has discriminated against Palestinians since Saddam's overthrow, creating a new refugee problem. Jordan has been taking steps to deny its Palestinians adequate representation. And that's only the way Palestinians are treated, to say nothing of how Copts are treated in Egypt, Christians under ISIS, gays in Iran, everyone other than Muslim men in Saudi Arabia, ect.

#120 Edited by turtlethetaffer (17223 posts) -

In cases like this there is no right side.

#121 Edited by wis3boi (32065 posts) -

lol at trying to find a good guy/bad guy. Both suck. One harbors terrorists that insist on poking a bear with a stick, and the bear fights back with no regards to safety or morals

#122 Posted by plageus900 (1384 posts) -

@wis3boi said:

lol at trying to find a good guy/bad guy. Both suck. One harbors terrorists that insist on poking a bear with a stick, and the bear fights back with no regards to safety or morals

This.

#123 Posted by DaJuicyMan (3531 posts) -

@thegerg: Of course it is. Was Bossperson's post completely not helpful to you?

#124 Posted by thegerg (16223 posts) -

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg: Of course it is. Was Bossperson's post completely not helpful to you?

"Of course it is" doesn't answer the question of "how?"

Anyway, is it because you think that the term is not accurate?

#125 Posted by DaJuicyMan (3531 posts) -

@thegerg: What I meant about Bossperson's post was that just because "collateral damage" doesn't grammatically get labeled as an act doesn't mean it isn't. Collateral damage is labeled that way to submerge what it actually is - mass homicide justified for "the greater good".

#126 Posted by LJS9502_basic (152919 posts) -

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg: What I meant about Bossperson's post was that just because "collateral damage" doesn't grammatically get labeled as an act doesn't mean it isn't. Collateral damage is labeled that way to submerge what it actually is - mass homicide justified for "the greater good".

Homicide is a legal term decided on by society. War generally is not defined as such and thus cannot be homicide. Sometimes definitions really are that important.

#127 Edited by Jebus213 (8926 posts) -

@Flubbbs said:

@JimB said:

@Flubbbs: Hamas is always getting a free pass. They are a terrorist group that hides behind women and children. They are the ones that start the conflict. They are cowards as soon as Israel gave Gaza as a homeland for the Palestinians, Hamas began attacking Israel with suicide bombers. Israel then built a wall to keep them out. Then Hamas started firing rockets in to Israel which has never stopped. When Israel defends its people fools who don't follow events run to blame Israel. I remember 911 the same people Israel is being scorned for killing were dancing in the streets, so forgive me if I have a hard time finding any sympathy.

oh ok.. and yea apartheid state, which is what the walls are for

I like how that pic doesn't include the mostly uninhabited land which was claimed by nobody.

#128 Posted by -Sun_Tzu- (17384 posts) -

@LJS9502_basic said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg: What I meant about Bossperson's post was that just because "collateral damage" doesn't grammatically get labeled as an act doesn't mean it isn't. Collateral damage is labeled that way to submerge what it actually is - mass homicide justified for "the greater good".

Homicide is a legal term decided on by society. War generally is not defined as such and thus cannot be homicide. Sometimes definitions really are that important.

Homicide:

"from homo "man" + -cidium "act of killing" (see -cide)."

"The killing of one human being by another"

"Not all homicide is unlawful"

Used in a sentence: "It must be very difficult to calculate homicide rates in prehistoric societies."

http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/87958

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/homicide

Definitions are indeed important.

#129 Posted by thegerg (16223 posts) -

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg: What I meant about Bossperson's post was that just because "collateral damage" doesn't grammatically get labeled as an act doesn't mean it isn't. Collateral damage is labeled that way to submerge what it actually is - mass homicide justified for "the greater good".

It's not an act. Plain and simple. It's the result of an act. Words have meaning, try to remember that.

#130 Edited by BSC14 (4185 posts) -

I agree it is absolutely terrible that civilians are being killed...women, child or man...whatever and on either side of the fence.

That said, why is it that I only see these types of post when Israel shows aggression and not when the Palestinians car bomb a supermarket? Is it somehow less terrible when innocent Israeli children are killed? If I look at your past post will I see the same outrage over the tons of people senselessly killed by the Palestinians? I bet not...

#131 Posted by DaJuicyMan (3531 posts) -

@thegerg: I'm sensing all this is going in one ear and out the other. Can't say I didn't try.

#132 Posted by thegerg (16223 posts) -

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg: I'm sensing all this is going in one ear and out the other. Can't say I didn't try.

The fact is that you're wrong. Collateral damage is not an act. An act may cause collateral damage, but it's simply incorrect to say that collateral damage is an act.

#133 Posted by alim298 (2218 posts) -

@BSC14 said:

I agree it is absolutely terrible that civilians are being killed...women, child or man...whatever and on either side of the fence.

That said, why is it that I only see these types of post when Israel shows aggression and not when the Palestinians car bomb a supermarket? Is it somehow less terrible when innocent Israeli children are killed? If I look at your past post will I see the same outrage over the tons of people senselessly by the Palestinians? I bet not...

Yeah I agree with this even though I always lean toward the Palestinians. If people were a little bit more sensitive about what Hamas and may I say other terrorist groups in the middle east are doing it might have never come to this. But with people saying: fvck Iraq fvck Israel fvck Palestine without ever considering that they are giving that fvck to kids and innocents too this happened and there's little blame to put on either side. I say if you want to blame someone blame the depraved human race.

#134 Posted by DaJuicyMan (3531 posts) -

@thegerg: Based on what? Grammar? This "incidental" damage is deliberately carried out. Attackers may know what their actions will do (kill innocents) and go through with it anyway. They weigh their options and DECIDE to kill women and children to get to their true enemies. It's thought out and acted out.

#135 Edited by thegerg (16223 posts) -

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg: Based on what? Grammar? This "incidental" damage is deliberately carried out. Attackers may know what their actions will do (kill innocents) and go through with it anyway. They weigh their options and DECIDE to kill women and children to get to their true enemies. It's thought out and acted out.

Based on what the term means. The fact that it's a result of an act doesn't mean that it is an act. The words that we use have meaning. It's important that we understand that. Communication becomes ineffective and dishonest if you choose to use words in a manner other than how they are defined.

Let's say that you drop a glass and it breaks on the floor. The broken glass was a result of the act of dropping it. Does that mean that broken glass is an act?

#136 Posted by DaJuicyMan (3531 posts) -

@thegerg: It takes deliberate action to decide to kill mass numbers of innocents in pursuit of an agenda. Hiding it behind "collateral damage" does nothing to me. This isn't comparable to broken glass, when dealing with human beings everything must be much more surgically carried out.

#137 Edited by thegerg (16223 posts) -

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg: It takes deliberate action to decide to kill mass numbers of innocents in pursuit of an agenda. Hiding it behind "collateral damage" does nothing to me. This isn't comparable to broken glass, when dealing with human beings everything must be much more surgically carried out.

None of that has any bearing on the fact that collateral damage is not an act. The words that we use have meaning. It's important that we understand that. Communication becomes ineffective and dishonest if you choose to use words in a manner other than how they are defined.

"This isn't comparable to broken glass"

What I'm comparing is another action and its result. Just answer the question, is broken glass an act?

#138 Posted by DaJuicyMan (3531 posts) -

@thegerg said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg: It takes deliberate action to decide to kill mass numbers of innocents in pursuit of an agenda. Hiding it behind "collateral damage" does nothing to me. This isn't comparable to broken glass, when dealing with human beings everything must be much more surgically carried out.

The words that we use have meaning. It's important that we understand that.

There you go, you're getting there. Now just stew on how these words support what I've been saying.

#139 Edited by thegerg (16223 posts) -

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

@thegerg: It takes deliberate action to decide to kill mass numbers of innocents in pursuit of an agenda. Hiding it behind "collateral damage" does nothing to me. This isn't comparable to broken glass, when dealing with human beings everything must be much more surgically carried out.

The words that we use have meaning. It's important that we understand that.

There you go, you're getting there. Now just stew on how these words support what I've been saying.

They don't support what you are saying. Collateral damage is not an act. You have yet to provide any logical reason why collateral damage is an act.

Let's look at a specific example. A military aircraft drops a bomb on a building from which mortars are being fired. That building and the mortar team are destroyed. The blast, unfortunately, also kills a man riding by and destroys his motorcycle. How are that dead man and his destroyed motorcycle an act?

#140 Edited by SaudiFury (8707 posts) -

@TehFuneral @AmazonTreeBoa @pie-junior Wafa Hospital given warning as it's being targeted by IDF, secondary explosions usual sign of stored weaponry.

Also UN has now twice found stored rockets in a vacant school next two other schools housing 1,500 displaced people...

Just thought you should be aware.

#141 Posted by airshocker (31210 posts) -

@SaudiFury said:

@TehFuneral @AmazonTreeBoa @pie-junior Wafa Hospital given warning as it's being targeted by IDF, secondary explosions usual sign of stored weaponry.

Also UN has now twice found stored rockets in a vacant school next two other schools housing 1,500 displaced people...

Just thought you should be aware.

So Israel didn't do anything wrong. Hospitals and schools cease being protected by the Geneva Convention when they are being used to wage war.

#142 Posted by jsolidus (171 posts) -

@TehFuneral: you must be young and ignorant of history. Im guessing you saw the pictures on facebook or what the media wants you too see and like many other young ignorant people are outraged. Well, this has been happening for years, it nothing new. In all wars innocent people die all the time and yes this includes children.

#143 Posted by PurpleLabel (314 posts) -

@xdude85 said:

Israel and Palestine fighting is nothing new, I don't get why people are all bent out of shape because of this.

They really aren't bent out of shape. People the like the OP really don't give a shit about real problems. They just make threads like this for attention. There is genocide happening in africa and general suffering, people being sold into sex slavery, actual slavery, and mass killings all over the place that happen every day. You never see anybody posting anything about the suffering that happens every single day for the last few thousand years. You don't see them donating their time making any real change or any true efforts to help make the world a better place. They just take a hot topic and take the side of the situation that is beyond stupid and obvious so they can make themselves feel like they're a better person.

Hamas uses people as human shields. They use children as weapons. Stop defending the fanatics already. It makes everybody including myself lose faith in the human race and the stupidity it brings to the table.

#144 Posted by Dom_Hawk_basic (406 posts) -

@chessmaster1989:

and the fact that if you're not jewish moving to Israel is a little bit of a hassle.

To reply to the OP: should they be doing it, no not really. long story short on this one is this thing really is political, and the blame for this ultimately falls with us here in the west. Although, for once in history its not us Americans who are at fault, its our cousins the brits.

#145 Posted by The_Last_Ride (75068 posts) -

Israel isn't even sloppy anymore, they're just killing everyone that get's in the way

#146 Posted by udUbdaWgz1 (633 posts) -

if i were israel, i'd have beat down everybody who attacks and reimbursed them every time.

lol, the one non-evil, i mean, non-muslim country in that entire region, lol. hmm, hey, muslim countries attacking israel, i'd love to blast you.

#147 Posted by MakeMeaSammitch (4798 posts) -

Israel has the right to defend itself.

I don't know if you're stupid or what, but what do you think a countries natural reaction to a series of attacks is going to be?

#148 Edited by Jag85 (5639 posts) -

@BossPerson said:

@thegerg said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

I feel physically sick hearing "collateral damage". That is so disrespectful

How is it disrespectful?

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them. Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, "I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so." Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:

"While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement."

The inflated style itself is a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. In our age there is no such thing as "keeping out of politics." All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer. I should expect to find -- this is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify -- that the German, Russian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the last ten or fifteen years, as a result of dictatorship.

-george orwell

This. Every time when it comes to the mass-murder of innocent men, women and children, you always get hordes of mass-murder apologists attempting to defend the indefensible, murdering a language with irrational semantic word-games, coming up with pseudo-intellectual political jargon to rationalize obvious crimes against humanity. This was true in the 1940's, and still remains true to this day.

This time though, it looks like most of the United Nations has finally grown a backbone, finally calling out Israel for its war crimes:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-stands-alone-in-vote-against-united-nations-inquiry-into-gaza-assault/5393287

...But it's touching to see America as the only nation to still support Israel's war crimes.

#150 Posted by thegerg (16223 posts) -

@Jag85 said:

@BossPerson said:

@thegerg said:

@DaJuicyMan said:

I feel physically sick hearing "collateral damage". That is so disrespectful

How is it disrespectful?

In our time, political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. Things like the continuance of British rule in India, the Russian purges and deportations, the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan, can indeed be defended, but only by arguments which are too brutal for most people to face, and which do not square with the professed aims of the political parties. Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness. Defenseless villages are bombarded from the air, the inhabitants driven out into the countryside, the cattle machine-gunned, the huts set on fire with incendiary bullets: this is called pacification. Millions of peasants are robbed of their farms and sent trudging along the roads with no more than they can carry: this is called transfer of population or rectification of frontiers. People are imprisoned for years without trial, or shot in the back of the neck or sent to die of scurvy in Arctic lumber camps: this is called elimination of unreliable elements. Such phraseology is needed if one wants to name things without calling up mental pictures of them. Consider for instance some comfortable English professor defending Russian totalitarianism. He cannot say outright, "I believe in killing off your opponents when you can get good results by doing so." Probably, therefore, he will say something like this:

"While freely conceding that the Soviet regime exhibits certain features which the humanitarian may be inclined to deplore, we must, I think, agree that a certain curtailment of the right to political opposition is an unavoidable concomitant of transitional periods, and that the rigors which the Russian people have been called upon to undergo have been amply justified in the sphere of concrete achievement."

The inflated style itself is a kind of euphemism. A mass of Latin words falls upon the facts like soft snow, blurring the outline and covering up all the details. The great enemy of clear language is insincerity. When there is a gap between one's real and one's declared aims, one turns as it were instinctively to long words and exhausted idioms, like a cuttlefish spurting out ink. In our age there is no such thing as "keeping out of politics." All issues are political issues, and politics itself is a mass of lies, evasions, folly, hatred, and schizophrenia. When the general atmosphere is bad, language must suffer. I should expect to find -- this is a guess which I have not sufficient knowledge to verify -- that the German, Russian and Italian languages have all deteriorated in the last ten or fifteen years, as a result of dictatorship.

-george orwell

This. Every time when it comes to the mass-murder of innocent men, women and children, you always get hordes of mass-murder apologists attempting to defend the indefensible, murdering a language with irrational semantic word-games, coming up with pseudo-intellectual political jargon to rationalize obvious crimes against humanity. This was true in the 1940's, and still remains true to this day.

This time though, it looks like most of the United Nations has finally grown a backbone, finally calling out Israel for its war crimes:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-stands-alone-in-vote-against-united-nations-inquiry-into-gaza-assault/5393287

...But it's touching to see America as the only nation to still support Israel's war crimes.

No one here is trying to defend mass murder.