BF2S Forums The SOLUTION to Terrorism.

Remove the state of Israel.

Renders your point/thread and views as retarded.
Sorry.

Sparx wrote:

I've edited my first post now it should be readable (Paragraphed). It was just random thoughts at first.

Unlike some of the other shitforbrains in here, I see the point you're making. And I agree that, even though it's not realistically possible, removing the state of Israel (not nuking or killing) would stop a lot of terrorism. The fact, however, is that Isreal is there. It will not go away. And even though I tend to be on Israel's side on these issues, I must admit there would be a lot less trouble if they simply weren't there. I think most of the people in here are afraid to either admit that, or think it's a statement only Hitler would be allowed to make.

Last edited by LaidBackNinja (2007-05-07 10:46:07)

LaidBackNinja wrote:

Sparx wrote:

I've edited my first post now it should be readable (Paragraphed). It was just random thoughts at first.

Unlike some of the other shitforbrains in here, I see the point you're making. And I agree that, even though it's not realistically possible, removing the state of Isreal (not nuking or killing) would stop a lot of terrorism. The fact, however, is that Isreal is there. It will not go away. And even though I tend to be on Isreal's side on these issues, I must admit there would be a lot less trouble if they simply weren't there. I think most of the people in here are afraid to either admit that, or think it's a statement only Hitler would be allowed to make.

Or perhaps Val Kilmer, there would be less trouble if the Palestinians stopped making trouble.  Fights usually work two ways you know?

Cougar wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

Sparx wrote:

I've edited my first post now it should be readable (Paragraphed). It was just random thoughts at first.

Unlike some of the other shitforbrains in here, I see the point you're making. And I agree that, even though it's not realistically possible, removing the state of Isreal (not nuking or killing) would stop a lot of terrorism. The fact, however, is that Isreal is there. It will not go away. And even though I tend to be on Isreal's side on these issues, I must admit there would be a lot less trouble if they simply weren't there. I think most of the people in here are afraid to either admit that, or think it's a statement only Hitler would be allowed to make.

Or perhaps Val Kilmer, there would be less trouble if the Palestinians stopped making trouble.  Fights usually work two ways you know?

I know mr. giant riding a bike, but 'eliminating' either of the two parties would do the trick, no? I'm not saying Israel SHOULD be removed (it shouldn't, and it can't), but I'm saying that it would solve the problem.

LaidBackNinja wrote:

Cougar wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

Unlike some of the other shitforbrains in here, I see the point you're making. And I agree that, even though it's not realistically possible, removing the state of Isreal (not nuking or killing) would stop a lot of terrorism. The fact, however, is that Isreal is there. It will not go away. And even though I tend to be on Isreal's side on these issues, I must admit there would be a lot less trouble if they simply weren't there. I think most of the people in here are afraid to either admit that, or think it's a statement only Hitler would be allowed to make.

Or perhaps Val Kilmer, there would be less trouble if the Palestinians stopped making trouble.  Fights usually work two ways you know?

I know mr. giant riding a bike, but 'eliminating' either of the two parties would do the trick, no? I'm not saying Israel SHOULD be removed (it shouldn't, and it can't), but I'm saying that it would solve the problem.

the same way the munich agreement did in the 1938 right?

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

Cougar wrote:

Or perhaps Val Kilmer, there would be less trouble if the Palestinians stopped making trouble.  Fights usually work two ways you know?

I know mr. giant riding a bike, but 'eliminating' either of the two parties would do the trick, no? I'm not saying Israel SHOULD be removed (it shouldn't, and it can't), but I'm saying that it would solve the problem.

the same way the munich agreement did in the 1938 right?

No. This is not about Jews and Hitler, let it go. This is about a state, artificially created, and a lot of people being pissed off about it. Whether the people living in said state are Jews, or if they have the right to be there is irrelevant at this point. Realistically, the Palestinians would do best to just get over it. But, in a fantasy world where everything is possible, it would be best just to remove Israel and dump all the Jews somewhere else so everybody would just shut up about it already.

Sparx wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

I know mr. giant riding a bike, but 'eliminating' either of the two parties would do the trick, no? I'm not saying Israel SHOULD be removed (it shouldn't, and it can't), but I'm saying that it would solve the problem.

the same way the munich agreement did in the 1938 right?

@Gunslinger: The Munich Agreement was to get the Jews of the European conscience, and grant the Jews a homeland. There is no way they would have known of the what it would cause.

It is the taboo solution. But like Ninja said, it cannot happen, and I say we should move past that.

talking about the same munich?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munich_agreement


lost just a tad bit of credability with me buddy.  you already have premade rebuttals when you obviously dont know what im talking about.

Mekstizzle wrote:

They should've just carved out Israel in Germany or France or something. The Germans wouldn't be able to say shit.

If we could go back in time that would have been my solution

Sorry I was talking about the UN Resolution, which was voted upon by member states to form Israel in an already existing Palestinian state.

Same situation no? Sovereign land of a country being given to another?

A little bit of relevance to gunslinger about appeasement.

Last edited by Sparx (2007-05-07 11:08:24)

Gunslinger, I agree that that would mean a given to Terrorism, which have worse consequences for the distant future. None the less, this is still all just hypothetical isn't it?

Last edited by Sparx (2007-05-07 11:08:09)

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

the same way the munich agreement did in the 1938 right?

No. This is not about Jews and Hitler, let it go. This is about a state, artificially created, and a lot of people being pissed off about it. Whether the people living in said state are Jews, or if they have the right to be there is irrelevant at this point. Realistically, the Palestinians would do best to just get over it. But, in a fantasy world where everything is possible, it would be best just to remove Israel and dump all the Jews somewhere else so everybody would just shut up about it already.

i brought up munich to illustrate the point of appeasement.  you say "Get rid of Israel and terrorism ceases to exist"  you may not condone that line of thinking but you are most definitely supporting that argument. 

I am saying that regardless of the situation, once you appease the aggressor, you are destined to have that situation snowball and turn into something much worse.  so by saying getting rid of israel and the terrorism stops you are saying the same thing people said about give Czechoslovakia to the nazis and theyll be happy.


ofcouse this argument went over your heads, surprising too for such powerful intellects.

Thanks for the personal insult there at the end, really helps your credibility. Anyway, you can't compare the Palistinians to Nazi Germany. Not ever. And no, not even then. After Israel is gone, the Palistinians won't go on to conquer the entire middle east and hunting Jews wherever they go. That comparison fails.
You also have to remember that in the eyes of the Palistinians, the Israelis are the 'agressors'. So in their eyes you are appeasing the aggressor as we speak.
While I do agree that removing Israel would mean that 'the bad guys win', it would solve the problem in a jiffy. It's not really a solution but it shows that carving Israel out there was a bad idea to begin with, regardless of who was right and their intentions.

Last edited by LaidBackNinja (2007-05-07 11:16:03)

LaidBackNinja wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

No. This is not about Jews and Hitler, let it go. This is about a state, artificially created, and a lot of people being pissed off about it. Whether the people living in said state are Jews, or if they have the right to be there is irrelevant at this point. Realistically, the Palestinians would do best to just get over it. But, in a fantasy world where everything is possible, it would be best just to remove Israel and dump all the Jews somewhere else so everybody would just shut up about it already.

i brought up munich to illustrate the point of appeasement.  you say "Get rid of Israel and terrorism ceases to exist"  you may not condone that line of thinking but you are most definitely supporting that argument. 

I am saying that regardless of the situation, once you appease the aggressor, you are destined to have that situation snowball and turn into something much worse.  so by saying getting rid of israel and the terrorism stops you are saying the same thing people said about give Czechoslovakia to the nazis and theyll be happy.


ofcouse this argument went over your heads, surprising too for such powerful intellects.

Thanks for the personal insult there at the end, really helps your credibility. Anyway, you can't compare the Palistinians to Nazi Germany. Not ever. And no, not even then. After Israel is gone, the Palistinians won't go on to conquer the entire middle east and hunting Jews wherever they go. That comparison fails.
You also have to remember that in the eyes of the Palistinians, the Israelis are the 'agressors'. So in their eyes you are appeasing the aggresor as we speak.
While I do agree that removing Israel would mean that 'the bad guys win', it would solve the problem in a jiffy. It's not really a solution but it shows that carving Israel out there was a bad idea to begin with, regardless of who was right and their intentions.

dude thats just wrong.  let me make another dumb analogy.


"In order to avoid bank robbers, lets burn the bank down."  i know exactly what yoursaying and to think that the removal of israel is gonna fix any kind of problem, its not.  a removal of israel will just prove one thing,  terrorism works and and the lives of non-combatants are unimportant. and the west is weak and lacks intestinal fortitude against one man with a suicide vest.     yes, the assholes will be emboldened.  im not saying theyll turn into conquerers, because they dont have the ability.

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

LaidBackNinja wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

i brought up munich to illustrate the point of appeasement.  you say "Get rid of Israel and terrorism ceases to exist"  you may not condone that line of thinking but you are most definitely supporting that argument. 

I am saying that regardless of the situation, once you appease the aggressor, you are destined to have that situation snowball and turn into something much worse.  so by saying getting rid of israel and the terrorism stops you are saying the same thing people said about give Czechoslovakia to the nazis and theyll be happy.


ofcouse this argument went over your heads, surprising too for such powerful intellects.

Thanks for the personal insult there at the end, really helps your credibility. Anyway, you can't compare the Palistinians to Nazi Germany. Not ever. And no, not even then. After Israel is gone, the Palistinians won't go on to conquer the entire middle east and hunting Jews wherever they go. That comparison fails.
You also have to remember that in the eyes of the Palistinians, the Israelis are the 'agressors'. So in their eyes you are appeasing the aggresor as we speak.
While I do agree that removing Israel would mean that 'the bad guys win', it would solve the problem in a jiffy. It's not really a solution but it shows that carving Israel out there was a bad idea to begin with, regardless of who was right and their intentions.

dude thats just wrong.  let me make another dumb analogy.

"In order to avoid bank robbers, lets burn the bank down."  i know exactly what yoursaying and to think that the removal of israel is gonna fix any kind of problem, its not.  a removal of israel will just prove one thing,  terrorism works and and the lives of non-combatants are unimportant. and the west is weak and lacks intestinal fortitude against one man with a suicide vest.     yes, the assholes will be emboldened.  im not saying theyll turn into conquerers, because they dont have the ability.

The thing is, Israel is not a bank and Palestinians are not bank robbers.

Sparx wrote:

No one is denying it will promote terror, all we're saying is that if it were not there, there would be much less terror.

Pretty much.

Last edited by LaidBackNinja (2007-05-07 11:24:51)