Why Arabs Lose Wars
- Thread starter DemoCoder
- Start date
RussSchultz said:
Depends on where you live. If you live near a reservation, you might experience the drunkards, but vast majority of Americans get their Indian experience from Dances with Wolves, et al.
Likewise, Asians are seen as hard workers, over achievers, to a fault, that many asian americans resent it. Asian gangs are a very very small phenomena and the media/pop culture doesn't present it at all compared to black and hispanic gang activity.
Average american does not fear being robbed or assaulted by an Asian, and an Asian in a store represents a customer, not a shoplifter.
Asians (e.g. chinese, japanese, etc) claiming negative discrimination just isn't credible. Now, central asians and south asians are a different matter, since their darker skin color puts them into a gray area. Plus, terrorism fears now make anyone who even remotely looks like an Arab suspect.
It makes perfect sense. Military support from sympathist nations? Did that occur to you? If they want they want to uphold elections at all they'd have to have some kind of a government. It is clear the establishment was nothing more than the illusion of democracy however. What is your point exactly? Do you not understand the premise of the question? It is pure common sense. Many people aren't going to settle with having their rights stripped of them by a communist goverment regardless the way it happens. Garuanteed people will fight against the rise of such a goverment regardless the flow of the majority.
That is why revolts happen. Not every revolution can be remotely peaceful. I do not agree with an apathetic view of political change.
hey deepak its the same in kashmir the muslims say its theres the hindus say its theres, the fact is even both pakistan and india are sick and tired of people getting involved in that dispute, the same case as in the middle east yes ?
Frankly i dont really care what these others are saying, there liars! they deny that they massacred red indians/ maoris/ Aboriginals etc etc, people must come to realize that the root of all evil is due to the imperial mind of the white race, for example i was talking earlier about slavery one person replied that slavery has existed for a long time within there local community thus it is/was acceptable for them to go to africa and make them into slaves, the african americans in the USA should be given compensation for thier forefathers suffering, just like the jews were given by germany for our suffering.
Frankly i dont really care what these others are saying, there liars! they deny that they massacred red indians/ maoris/ Aboriginals etc etc, people must come to realize that the root of all evil is due to the imperial mind of the white race, for example i was talking earlier about slavery one person replied that slavery has existed for a long time within there local community thus it is/was acceptable for them to go to africa and make them into slaves, the african americans in the USA should be given compensation for thier forefathers suffering, just like the jews were given by germany for our suffering.
Also i would like to add, the root of racism is a product of the white race, for example you dont see chinese people calling blacks offensive words, and you dont see indians/pakistans calling chinese people offensive words and vice versa, it is always the narrow minded whiteman that indulges in this form of self righteous behaviour, i have come to the conclusion that this is due to the fact that white peoples minds are not advanced enought to be able to grasp the idea that some people are different that is why they indulge in racial attacks and abuse, look at me every saturday i get some teenage punk call me "kike" "Jew Ba*stard", and i hear "Hitler" wich is more offensive to me than the words above.
Israeli said:
OMFG I laughed so hard. Let me relate a story.
Back in college, I went to school for summer in Austria. One of the girls I was travelling with was half black/half vietnamese. Though she did not look vietnamese, she spoke vietnamese. We shared a cabin on a train once with a group of vietnamese nationals and they said (in vietnamese) "Look out, watch your stuff, its a black american!".
Essentially, the whole mantra of black power in the 70's (No charlie ever called me a nigger) is a pile of horse shit. Hong Kong residents look down on mainland chinese residents; Taiwanese believe they're vastly superiour to mainland chinese. The indian subcontinent is rife with intra-culture racism.
In short--racism is not an invention of the white man.
I'm not sure why I even responded, however. Its obvious you're trolling.
as for native american discrimination... there are no reservations around where I live, but native's are almost always labeled as alcoholic, lazy, abusive, and unreliable. Many are not given job's because of racial discrimination. That is the way whites/black/asians/anyone else I missed treats the native americans. Maybe not where you live, but just how many native americans do see that you are able to treat fairly? Where natives actually live there is discrimination. Also, there is very heavy discrimination against asians, particularly the vietnamese.
I shouldn't post in this thread but here goes.... 
I regards to Native Americans I am one but I 've never been on a rez nor do I need to. However the conditions on reservations in the US are statistically worse than Afghanistan.
i hate to break to you it's an Us vs Them world , always has been always will. The article is dead on though.
If you ignor the title of the article and read the basic jist of the article he is saying that in order to defeat the Armies of "free" countries your army must be free as well. Either way the free society will make the other free either through conflict or assimilation.
The only way to defeat the "racist attitude of the world" (because every society that isn't homoganeous has there class to spit on i.e. Ainu of Japan) is to point our fingers at it and don't let it go unidentified. Muach like this thread points out the rascist connotations of the title. AFAIK Egypt isn't in the ARABian desert. Unfortunately they are classified as "Why Arabs Lose Wars" , in fact they are the primary example.
I regards to Native Americans I am one but I 've never been on a rez nor do I need to. However the conditions on reservations in the US are statistically worse than Afghanistan.
i hate to break to you it's an Us vs Them world , always has been always will. The article is dead on though.
If you ignor the title of the article and read the basic jist of the article he is saying that in order to defeat the Armies of "free" countries your army must be free as well. Either way the free society will make the other free either through conflict or assimilation.
The only way to defeat the "racist attitude of the world" (because every society that isn't homoganeous has there class to spit on i.e. Ainu of Japan) is to point our fingers at it and don't let it go unidentified. Muach like this thread points out the rascist connotations of the title. AFAIK Egypt isn't in the ARABian desert. Unfortunately they are classified as "Why Arabs Lose Wars" , in fact they are the primary example.
No that is not true at all. Vietnam failed for other reasons then that. One being military limitations.
The korean war wasn't a failure.
Then it is about apathy. As apathy is a choice.
No it isn't. Israel is not a majority amongst its militant surrounding populations. Thought they are clearly capable of protecting themselves. You can look throughout history and find examples of what i am talking about. The greeks and persians are another good example.
We? I said before apart of helping the minority could easily be seeking help from other ally nations.
Well thats a diff context in the israeli palestinian issue. In vietnam it was the majority who wanted any colonial remnants whether french or their percieved allies the US or the southern vietnamese elites linked to the old colonial powers removed... You can fantasize all you want but without such widespread support which fed high morale in the vietcong army and popualtion at large the US would have won hands down. I dont know what you have read here but many who lived and chronicled the war have admitted this.
-I mean opposing a majority whithin a country-. In the case of Israel most want not Israel thrown into the seas but only the occupied territories liberated and the Palestinians with access to citizenship and (likley for most) the economic and other opportunities afforded them when they recieve statehood.
Vietnam was a clear failure on many levels. One of which was the US opposing the majorities desire for unification and freedom from their elites and foreign rule. It wasnt just a military failure...
In the context of the time with decades of war the vast majority of the people latched on to communism to gain allies in the soviet block. Cuba did same even tho the revolutions they started werent communist to begin with. Does that mean the people wanted their rights removed? But to oppose what they want at that time were crucial mistakes. People who have suffered greatly make sacrifices. They dont necessarily intend to have rights lost. But there was no democracy to save in the first place in either case.
Castro and Ho had overwhelming popular support at the time.
-I mean opposing a majority whithin a country-. In the case of Israel most want not Israel thrown into the seas but only the occupied territories liberated and the Palestinians with access to citizenship and (likley for most) the economic and other opportunities afforded them when they recieve statehood.
Vietnam was a clear failure on many levels. One of which was the US opposing the majorities desire for unification and freedom from their elites and foreign rule. It wasnt just a military failure...
In the context of the time with decades of war the vast majority of the people latched on to communism to gain allies in the soviet block. Cuba did same even tho the revolutions they started werent communist to begin with. Does that mean the people wanted their rights removed? But to oppose what they want at that time were crucial mistakes. People who have suffered greatly make sacrifices. They dont necessarily intend to have rights lost. But there was no democracy to save in the first place in either case.
Castro and Ho had overwhelming popular support at the time.
Well depending what elections ho and castro held at what time... I of course do not condone oppression of any minority. Im just saying it might not justify war all the time tho. Many times I think it does and no intervention is had (rwanda) but sometimes its not warranted. I dont think the intervention in vietnam was warranted nor Cuba of the 50's to early 60's.
The attack on the jews at the time wasnt part of a racist arab but more part of an arab rejection of what they saw as more colonialism. Not to mention the ancient memories of the crusades. They didnt see Jews coming to Israel as much as europeans. Had a good talk with palestinian who owned a youth hostel at jaffa gate in jerusalem over this. Most palestinians in Israel or the occupied territories arent terrorist but they are increasingly frustrated and radicalized by their plight.
The longer israel is in this position of power and uses the crimes of hamas to deny all the palestinians their own right to some kind of state the longer the terrorist problems will last. And the worse they could be.
I dont think its reasonable to expect every single palestinian to behave or else no peace accord is to be implemented.
There are even jews who dont agree with the idea that the coming to Israel of european jews was totally peaceful. Acts of terror by jews against the british mandate certainly didnt reassure many arabs at the time...
How it would be nice to think of the whole tragedy of the holocaust to israel was a 100% legitimate thing. I see fault on both sides. Certainly is true some arabs moved into israel to protect their 3rd most holy site by sheer presence of numbers but many arabs were living there long before the european immigration to israel began...
I do think the ethnic cleasning of jews in other countries sort of negates the ethnic cleansing of some arabs from israel proper into the occurpied territories. I dont think I need to quote UN rezs as to why they can be called occupied territories. Heck even Sharon admniited that a couple weeks ago.
I think we have to settle for the likelyhood jews wont return to to those muslim countreis they were kicked out of anymore than the 2million or so arabs who want right of return to Israel proper. Its neither feasible nor reasonable now...
Of course had overwhelming force been used in Vietnam the war couldve been 'won' militarily. But at an unholy cost the 2 million dead might have seemed a picnic by comparison. It would have invited a larger conflict too. Maybe even a major Russian contingent along a chinese one like in Korea. And this time they would have been a lot better prepared than in 51...
Had the political will ignored world and home public opinion for a more agressive war it could have been worse than losing... It simply need not have been fought in the first place. Vietnam like China is opening now and the regime might have opened sooner had the US not try to clean up the mess France had made.
I think any debate on whether one should resort to violence or not as a minority to defend its rights need be a case by case basis. I certainly would see interventions in germany of ww2 and rwanda and kosovo as legitimate.
I do think not every communist state need be feared that much by a minority especially if it isnt openly oppressing a minority. Certainly is mostly a intellectual exercise now. Communism is largely gone.. lets look at something else that is more current.
The attack on the jews at the time wasnt part of a racist arab but more part of an arab rejection of what they saw as more colonialism. Not to mention the ancient memories of the crusades. They didnt see Jews coming to Israel as much as europeans. Had a good talk with palestinian who owned a youth hostel at jaffa gate in jerusalem over this. Most palestinians in Israel or the occupied territories arent terrorist but they are increasingly frustrated and radicalized by their plight.
The longer israel is in this position of power and uses the crimes of hamas to deny all the palestinians their own right to some kind of state the longer the terrorist problems will last. And the worse they could be.
I dont think its reasonable to expect every single palestinian to behave or else no peace accord is to be implemented.
There are even jews who dont agree with the idea that the coming to Israel of european jews was totally peaceful. Acts of terror by jews against the british mandate certainly didnt reassure many arabs at the time...
How it would be nice to think of the whole tragedy of the holocaust to israel was a 100% legitimate thing. I see fault on both sides. Certainly is true some arabs moved into israel to protect their 3rd most holy site by sheer presence of numbers but many arabs were living there long before the european immigration to israel began...
I do think the ethnic cleasning of jews in other countries sort of negates the ethnic cleansing of some arabs from israel proper into the occurpied territories. I dont think I need to quote UN rezs as to why they can be called occupied territories. Heck even Sharon admniited that a couple weeks ago.
I think we have to settle for the likelyhood jews wont return to to those muslim countreis they were kicked out of anymore than the 2million or so arabs who want right of return to Israel proper. Its neither feasible nor reasonable now...
Of course had overwhelming force been used in Vietnam the war couldve been 'won' militarily. But at an unholy cost the 2 million dead might have seemed a picnic by comparison. It would have invited a larger conflict too. Maybe even a major Russian contingent along a chinese one like in Korea. And this time they would have been a lot better prepared than in 51...
Had the political will ignored world and home public opinion for a more agressive war it could have been worse than losing... It simply need not have been fought in the first place. Vietnam like China is opening now and the regime might have opened sooner had the US not try to clean up the mess France had made.
I think any debate on whether one should resort to violence or not as a minority to defend its rights need be a case by case basis. I certainly would see interventions in germany of ww2 and rwanda and kosovo as legitimate.
I do think not every communist state need be feared that much by a minority especially if it isnt openly oppressing a minority. Certainly is mostly a intellectual exercise now. Communism is largely gone.. lets look at something else that is more current.
I understand this. There are clearly times that opposition may not be in the best interest of the people. However merely giving in isn't a good idea all the time either. It depends on the situation. Say for instance if the germanic tribes had surrendered to Rome i think they would have been alright in terms of survival. I don't suspect rome would choose to wipe them out. In terms of Greece and Persian? It was in the Athenian's and Spartan's best interest to stop Persia in any way possible.
No I don't think so. When Israel declared itself a state they revolted. Not before. Not to mention that Arab raiders attacked many Jewish settlers long before the mandate was turned over in '48. This happened so often in fact that a jewish task force was assembled to protect the settlers. There are clearly biggoted motives behind this.
I am not buying this. The support of terrorism amongst the palestinian ranks undermines their credibility as does the silent condolence of the murder of innocent people. Their "plight" as you call is vastly their fault and the fault of other arab nations who refuse to help them. Let us not forget the many jews who were forced from their homes in neighboring Syria and Jordon all of whom have moved on with their lives. Many of whom have become successful. Why is it that the palestinians even after over 50 years haven't accomplished this? I can tell you it has little or nothing to do with Jewish oppression.
Absolute nonsense The jews have been willing to aid the palestinians in achieving statehood regardless of the bogus nature of the palestinian claims. The Jews don't owe them anything. Those lands they "occupy" were apart of the palestine mandate. It is as much Israel's land now as it was in '48 when the land was returned to ME control. The arabs themselves were the ones who sabataged an Arab Palestinian statehood in the begining by invading the lands.
Giving in to terrorism is an admittion of failure in this case. Israel is doing the right thing by putting down the palestinian terrorists and not giving into their demands. If these palestinians are so propeace why are you so certain these attacks will continue, grow in number and in verocity? Could it be because of the growing support of terrorism in the palestinian ranks? Why should Israel respect these palestinians for the support of such murderous and cowardly actions?
What is a Palestinian Pax? I don't see Palestine on a map anywhere. Aren't they just people of the land which was marked as palestine before and during '48? Wouldn't that also make the Jews palestinians? Couldn't the so called Palestinians (arabs) be apart of that supposed Jewish state? Israel allows for arab citizens. I have said this before. They aren't trying to prevent the Arabs from participating. We know Israel as a jewish state only becasuse of its jewish majority. The majority exist not because Israel is some kind of jewish specific club.
Refusing them statehood because of Hamas? Why not? The support of terrorism amongst radical palestinians is at the heart of the problem.
I don't think that is the case. I think the Israelis are well aware of the growing radicalism of the palestinian arabs. They clearly perceive danger from these individuals. From what i have read and seen they are easily justified.
I suppose you are addressing the groups called Haganah and Hashomer. Both of these groups were formed to protect the Isreali settlers from arab raiders. They didn't do as you have claimed. Shall we compare the vaguly questionable actions they were involved with to that of those perpetrated by the arab raiders?
-Nothing incomparison to the actions of the arabs during that time who felt no remorse for the settlers they pillaged and murdered. Again no more equivalancy can be drawn.
Really? Howevery ou seem to turn ad blind eye to the number of crimes on the side of arabs that vastly out weighs those on the side of the jews. Case in point: how many times do you hear about a jew car bombing a bus of small children? Never? Hardly ever? Once in ten years?
Honestly Pax? Can you not seen the difference?
That isn't so. Actually if you read many european accounts of the area around the turn of the century to the 40s Israel was a rather baren and unpopulated place. Many of whom lived there were nothing more than farmers who worked for the wealthy landowners. In my links i posted before such information is included. The jews mainly purchased the land from those wealthy turkish land owners and began redeveloping the area even prior to the 40s. The "european" migration (or Jewish migration rather) prior to and during the 40s brought on large amounts of arab raiders toward israel to attack the migrant population they saw as easy targets. They soon learned this was not so.
From a link
What is wrong with the Jews migrating to the palestinian mandate? Why can't they live there
ethnic cleansing of arabs by jews? What on earth are you talking about? The jews aren't massacring arabs at all. How on earth can you say this when israel allows for arab citizens? The Arabs on the other hand have tried to exterminate the jews on several occassions.
You don't think you need to repeat the UN rez? Come on. With the kind of reasoning they use within it we can easily say the arabs are living in occupied lands taken from the byzantine greeks!
Its called life. The jews have moved on. The arabs haven't.
Won't return or can't return? Their houses were taken along with their property. This action isn't any better then what you are accussing the jews of doing. Why shouldn't the arabs return the jewish possession they took?
China wasn't much of a threat then and isn't now. Their military is in shambles and their navy is laughable. I don't believe russia was going to risk an attack.
Well they certainly weren't well prepared in '51 (neither were we) or now. Why should they have been in 60-70s?
At the cost of many lives under communism. Perhaps Hitler would have let up over time as well? Doubtful. Not looking back years after Chinese communism serves as a horrid passage of their history. What has caused china to open up has been increasing amounts of western development/exposure in their culture (much like what happened in Russia). Logically US involvement then helped to losen the grasp of communism over china and the surrounding nations.
I disagree, i believe intervention should be on a case to case basis. Who are we to tell those who are against totalitarinism and comunism they must submit and obey their government?
Interesting wording you use. Communism openly oppresses everyone. That is its nature as has been documented through time. Communism functions by use of high amounts of control over its populace. Therefore it is by its nature to oppress the minority and majority.
It still exists however as does totalitarianism though the lines have clearly been blurred.
Yeah they have been trying to help them acheive statehood over any piece of the west bank that doesnt have any aquifier or oil and gas (they recently found some potential sites).
You do realize its not me you are disagreeing with but a slew of jewish and israeli historians. So using such language as 'absolute nonsense' is basically pitting you against a hell of a body of research already out there and from quite surprising sources. One historian from tel aviv university recently on CBC called upon withdrawal from the occupied territories immediately as there was no legal basis for continuing the occupation (his words). Its also a plain fact that occupation wont resolve the terrorist problem. Id use the same forces to lock down the borders if terrorism persisted AFTER the occupation ended however and thats understandable.
Simply a lost cause to make me and most westerners try to believe this is a black and white issue legion. This situation has been scrutinized for years and crimes have and are being committed by both sides.
I dont accept as do many other jewish obersvers the legal argument from the old 'british mandate'. It wasnt democratic and has long ago been revisited by un resolutions and other more legitimate obervations... The brit general observation about no arabs in palestine is absurd. There were small numbers of all grousp at the time... gimme numbers from real census (tho Ive seen them a few years back) and you'll see arabs living in all areas but especially jerusalem...
You can insist on denying the palestinians their right to self determination with the resulting probs itll create in terms of terrorism and social upheaval as Israel has overwhelming power. This is not much diff than kosovo with the serbs over the albanians. But they dont want to live under Israeli Rule so you'll need to accept it and be accomodating for the interest of both sides if you want peace.
My last bit on this... we're too far apart on the issue for any possible enlightenment in a newsgroup discussion...
You do realize its not me you are disagreeing with but a slew of jewish and israeli historians. So using such language as 'absolute nonsense' is basically pitting you against a hell of a body of research already out there and from quite surprising sources. One historian from tel aviv university recently on CBC called upon withdrawal from the occupied territories immediately as there was no legal basis for continuing the occupation (his words). Its also a plain fact that occupation wont resolve the terrorist problem. Id use the same forces to lock down the borders if terrorism persisted AFTER the occupation ended however and thats understandable.
Simply a lost cause to make me and most westerners try to believe this is a black and white issue legion. This situation has been scrutinized for years and crimes have and are being committed by both sides.
I dont accept as do many other jewish obersvers the legal argument from the old 'british mandate'. It wasnt democratic and has long ago been revisited by un resolutions and other more legitimate obervations... The brit general observation about no arabs in palestine is absurd. There were small numbers of all grousp at the time... gimme numbers from real census (tho Ive seen them a few years back) and you'll see arabs living in all areas but especially jerusalem...
You can insist on denying the palestinians their right to self determination with the resulting probs itll create in terms of terrorism and social upheaval as Israel has overwhelming power. This is not much diff than kosovo with the serbs over the albanians. But they dont want to live under Israeli Rule so you'll need to accept it and be accomodating for the interest of both sides if you want peace.
My last bit on this... we're too far apart on the issue for any possible enlightenment in a newsgroup discussion...
Similar threads
