A good war can exist. But such is only a war for survival between species. As Species have different moral codes.. All are 'correct'. As one cannot be judged 'morally' by another. Humans have yet to be involved in such a conflict. Ergo.. There has yet to be 'good' war on earth or involving humanity. In ww2. The allies may have been justified in crushing national socialist germany. Yet look at Palestine only 3 years later. The brits had to be 'ejected' by jews who had had enough of being lorded over by 'masters'. Intolerable considering .. the treatment in ww2. Something quick forgotten by imperial England. Japan Philippines Korea. All .. benevolently overseen by US power. Vietnam immediately reoccupied by french. The good guys all rushed back in to grab what they could. lol
So a good war only exist in theory or from a subjective outlook. Lol... this discovery seem to have made quite an impact on you. Lol.
Oh come now! The British were in Palestine only as a result of a League of Nations mandate following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire as a result of WWI The League of Nations TOLD us to go and govern that province for the well-being of the Palestinians. And the Jews ... from the point of view of the Palestinians (and hence also their internationally mandated governors) came as invaders. It may have been their ancestral homeland ... but the Jews who sought repatriation to Palestine in 1947 / 1948 were no more "natives" of Palestine then a modern descendant of the Apache resident somewhere in Wyoming is a "native" of Texas. Again, though, I don't need to defend what was done in Palestine in 47 - 48. Maybe they got it wrong. but I'm not sure that it's clear what "getting it right" would have looked like, even with the benefit of 20:20 hindsight.
Well at least 1 in 100 thousand is thinking about it. Tell me.. what parameters do you have for a 'good war. Unfounded understanding of something you have little knowledge of? Answer with a position.. not a useless personal 'in joke'. all morality is subjective.. Unless you believe that morality is like gravity. An objective law Ask anything and i will debate it.. frightened? Prill aka Razor
So Jews came from? Nowhere.? They just came into being. Well thats quite a trick. Was not Jesus a Jew.. from Nazareth.. Thats smack in middle of 'palestine' Did the roman empire have a problem with palestinians.. no.. apparently jews caused all the fuss.. they convoyed in from the planet zion to make trouble. Palestinians are the Arabic peoples who live in THE SAME PLACE as the Jewish peoples Palestine/Israel Im an australian.. yet the Kouri peoples of this land are of it and have a claim to live here as i do in the short few hundred years of white domination and terror. So many have this thing about jews.. Personally i think A jew.. Albert Einstein was the greatest person who ever lived. And The 4 wars the jews fought. 1948 1956 1967 and 1973 forged them in to a fighting force even the cream of germany [like guderian] wound have wanted on their side. what is wyoming and texas. to an american indian?.. words to steal a future
Oh the league of nations.. well. of course Britain never colonized and slaughtered unless the L.O.N. Said so.. Look at India.. south Africa. Australia Hong kong. Jordan Persia iraq Egypt. Sudan. N/Zeeland. Kenya. Ireland Scotland The 13 states [US] And of course they did so to maintain civil relations and keep the peace. Jolly good of them ..no? Prill aka Razor ps love the sox on you sig girl
I don't have exact parameters...? To be clear: I was not sarcastic about the statement that a good war is merely subjective. All morality is subjective indeed.
We're only talking about Jews because the issue which got brought up was the British in Palestine, which was ruled by Britain under a League of Nations mandate from just after the first world war until just after the second. Prior to that it had been part of the Ottoman empire. I made no claim that the Jews came from nowhere ... you invented that claim for teh sole purpose of knocking it down to make me look silly and you clever. But if you read my post again, you'll find that it's not there. You carefully quoted only part of what I had said, omitting the very clear statement that Palestine was "their ancestral homeland". So I did in fact acknowledge that fact. However, the Jews who sought to relocate to Palestine in 1946, 7, 8 came from Germany, Austria, Russia, Poland ... all over the place, in fact; their ancestors had not lived in Palestine for many many generations; whilst the Palestinians whom they sought to displace had. Both peoples viewed the land as "theirs"; neither wanted to share it with the other; and the British somehow had to hold the ring. Maybe they didn't do a very good job of it ... maybe they did. It's easy to be wise with the benefit of hindsight, which is 20:20. Unfortunately the guys on the ground didn't have that benefit. So they had to choose ... between turning away the Jews who had suffered massively during the (then very recent) Holocaust, and who sought only to be allowed to come back together as a people and to settle in their ancient ancestral homeland; or welcomign them in, and displacing the Palestinians who had lived their for generations to maek room for teh Jews. So if you'd been in charge of that situation, what would YOU have done? And why?
Why would palestinians be 'displaced'. There is 3 times the population in israel now as there was then.. they all fit in. 30 million live in Greater shanghai metropolitan area,, which is far smaller than israel. Let them come to israel.. and then the brits get the hell out.. what has it to do with them? 'A mater of empire'? good grief there is plenty of room. If Palestinians get 'displaced it i is because the jews have returned to zion' and palestine must be a part of it. Not fair you say.. tell that to all the millions who have had nations and borders MADE for them by imperial powers. Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. iran iraq. jordan.. all defined by imperialist powers with oft little consideration for local problems. BUT, when it comes to jews .. oh well thats different. gentiles have a problem.. like impotence. when it comes to jews. Prill PS. Good reply..Thanks for engaging ..more?
We're going over old ground here. The Brits were there because the League of Nations mandated it. Nothing to do with Empire. Now remind me again ... why were the Americans in the Phillipines? And what were the Rough Riders doing on San Juan Hill?
Well to be fair the Americans were in Cuba because there were some pretty terrible atrocities going on in Cuba by Spanish authorities prior to the Maine explosion that were enraging the American public. Following the Maine explosion there was essentially no way the country couldn't go to war as the public was demanding it, even though it's widely assumed now the Maine suffered a boiler explosion, not an attack by the Spanish. President McKinley had actually been against intervention, seeking a peaceful resolution between demands of the local populace and the Spanish authorities, but the reaction from the public and yellow journalism made war inevitable. The Philippines just happened to belong to Spain. Although, at least we paid Spain $20 million in 1898 dollars in the Treaty of Paris for the islands, and was granted commonwealth semi autonomous status in 1934. I mean we have a lot of blood on our hands in regards to the Philippines, but it's a lot better in many regards compared to European colonization.
So the native Phillipinos got a better deal than the native Americans? Nice to see some progress being made in that respect ... (Only $20 Million? That seems a bit on the cheap side. Wasn't it $100 Million for the Black Hills ... which the Sioux still haven't drawn, because the Black Hills "weren't for sale"?) :mickey:
I'm talking about European colonization of Africa and east Asia that was simultaneously happening. And $20 million in 1898 money is a decent chunk of cash in a time where the entire federal budget was only around $480 million for something we could've just taken since we had won a war over them. And yes, the Sioux were awarded $103 million in United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians. The Sioux actually refuse to accept the money as it would legally mean they have no right to regain the Black Hills and the money still sits in the Bureau of Indian Affairs, it's up to like 400 or 500 million now. Although they(not the Sioux specifically, Native Americans in general) did manage to get a $3.5 billion settlement out of the DoJ http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/dec2009/land-d14.shtml Still a pittance of what they're truly owed. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobell_v._Salazar
Sure you are ... Americans always do. They like to pretend to be occupying the moral high ground over such issues. At least the Europeans allowed the native peoples of the countries they colonised to stay on their own soil. Oh ... except in teh case of Diego Garcia, of course. We had to clear that out to make way for an American bomber base.
Yes Europeans are so generous.. dont deport the jews gas them.. While the catholics kill all women of influence in mid ages to establish male dominance. And butcher a million in crusades because their god [the same god] is in their eyes different thats like 10 million Equal to US take over of diego garcia minus 9, 998,000 and not dead Where america becomes murderers. Is dresden in '45. Or the 7 million tons of bombs dropped on N Vietnam for little effect but slaughter of people. All governments kill.. Some like USSR followed by 3rd Reich. Are wonton and vicious. Some like UK france belgium Are land controllers. As you are Brit. would you REALLY like me to list atrocities the empire committed in lands not theirs? Question ONE . Why is England in any other country than England. Who invited them? Prill
That's OK Prill ... I know much of what happened during the British Imperial period. You don't need to list it. I know and acknowledge it. I tend to find that Americans are far less willing to acknowledge the wanton and vicious murdering and land controlling actions committed in the name of America in the past. I tend to think one should start at Wounded Knee, and work backwards. And ask yourself that same question. Why are Americans in the plains and the Indians confined to "reservations"? Who invited them?
I agree why where European settlers who called themselves Americans. Killing anyone? Why where Brits who called themselves Australians killing aborigines? Why where the communists who called themselves 'socialists' butchering millions of their own [example ukrainians] This is the world our species has made. Dont blame one part of it and ignore the rest.. If we all had the gumption to stand up and risk life for our ideals.. well the world might not be such a crap social nightmare it has become. I offer myself as the 1st guilty one. I did not so stand up. On my deathbed.Well now i understand Oscar Wilde. “Either this wallpaper goes, or I do. (Oscar Wilde's dying words)”
