Iain Hall's SANDPIT

Home » Ethical questions » Pat Condell “Peace in the Middle East”

Pat Condell “Peace in the Middle East”

Pat is clear, lucid and absolutely right here, as I have said many times when faced with an enemy who will not compromise you have two choices, kill them all or surrender, as the latter is not an option then what can you do but try to kill those enemies?

Cheers Comrades

 DEDICATED TO Damian Doyle who is so  in love with the “religion of peace”.

Advertisements

31 Comments

  1. Richard Ryan says:

    Pat Condell?—–The Lord Haw Haw spokesperson of the Zionist Regime

  2. Iain Hall says:

    Why are you so keen to endorse the Jihadists Richard?

  3. deknarf says:

    One more warmonger spouting his hate about a situation that admits of no solution whilst both parties adopt their extremist positions and the rest of the world sits on its hands.

  4. Iain Hall says:

    Do you think that Hamas can be reasoned with or that they can ever be trusted Deknarf?

  5. Tel says:

    … when faced with an enemy who will not compromise you have two choices, kill them all or surrender …

    You can bottle them up and wait it out. That’s pretty much what happened with North Korea.

    Mind you, modern secular societies who believe in freedom of conscience and separation of church and state don’t make war against populations, instead we make war against the leaders of those populations and against the organizations that hold people subject. I agree that Hamas have become much more militant than they used to be and the current rocket attacks are a really stupid move for the Palestinians. Over time Israel will improve their defences, and upgrade their technology until they are world leaders… the attacks only make the Israeli people more determined.

    Having said that, I really have no better ideas, except to say that Israel should become a secular constitutional state that is willing to offer scrupulously equal rights to Muslim citizens, provided those Muslims are willing to obey the law and renounce certain violent aspects of Islam (i.e. renounce religious killings, not attempt to impose Sharia, etc). I doubt Israel is willing to become a secular state, nor are any of their neighbours, so we expect this to just continue indefinitely.

  6. Craig says:

    Eh the Middle East and North Africa demographics along differing ethnic and religious sect lines, some what resembles that of Europe pre WW2. That is why it’s like a tinder box in NA and the ME.

    Makes me wonder if the flame should of been added 20 years ago in hope of a smaller explosion, as it’ll probably go off sooner or latter anyway. Particularly as the petrodollar declines and the agridollar ascends.

  7. deknarf says:

    ‘Reason’ is not a word I would use in dealing with either Hamas or Israel, nor ‘trust’ for that matter.

  8. Iain Hall says:

    deknarf
    I think that you Israel a disservice by suggesting that they are in any way the same as Hamas, Israel is clearly not perfect but they are orders of magnitude more trustworthy and virtuous than Hamas.

  9. deknarf says:

    It has always surprised me, that given their history, the Jews have a tendency to behave in the same manner as those who oppressed them. While I’m all in favour in standing up for your rights I find their treatment of the Palestinians somewhat akin to that of the opressors that they once suffered under. That’s what disturbs me.

  10. Iain Hall says:

    The Palestinians could have had peace years ago had they only been prepared to act honourably and had it suited their Arab sponsors but anti-Semitism runs so deep within in the Muslim Diaspora that any peace deal is impossible.

  11. deknarf says:

    Hmmm? I’m more of the view that it is entrenched positions from both sides that have created this mess. I can only agree with you that it has reached such a state that any peace deal is now impossible. Like Ireland, Serbia, Szebreniska, the Hutu and the Tutsi the hatreds are now embedded so deep and so generational that any form of peace is probably an unrealisable dream by the overly optimistic.
    It has been said that the best outcome might have been to provide both sides with all the arms they require and let them fight it out until only one side survives, or that none survive. It’s an abhorrent thought and goes against everything we believe in but you have to wonder it that will ultimately be the only solution — which is frighteningly like the final solution is it not? If it should come to such, then mankind has truly lost its humanity and learnt nothing from the past!

  12. Iain Hall says:

    Well I have long thought that there are ethical problems with thinking that every conflict can be solved bloodlessly because it seems to me that such solutions solve nothing in the long run and just create the sort of social abscess that we see in Gaza, a puss filled place that needs lancing if ever there is to be any healing. As you reluctantly suggest there will come a time when the only way to resolve the conflict is by force of arms until there is a decisive defeat of one side or the other. I’d put my money on Israel winning though If I were you.

  13. deknarf says:

    Given the technological advantage that Israel has it will quite likely win the battle against the Palestinians if the conflict is now, it will however, never win the war of attrition that will continue against Israel just as the Russians lost in Afghanistan, the Americans lost in Vietnam and in Iraq and the Coalition forces will ultimately lose in Afghanistan. The evidence is clear that you never win a guerrilla war on the guerrilla’s own turf.

  14. Richard Ryan says:

    AS Mandela said, “it is the oppressor who dictates the tactics of the oppressed”.

  15. Richard Ryan says:

    But this is my favourite quote: “You can kill ten of our men for every one we kill of yours, but even at those odds, you will lose and we will win. ——–Ho Chi Minh.

  16. Damian says:

    Iain, why are looking to a comedian for insight about one of the world’s most intractable and protracted violent conflicts? Surely there are other sources you could consult if you truly sought an understanding of the situation. As for the image at the foot of your post, well that just reminds us again how far you have lurched in the direction of bigotry. I can’t pinpoint the moment when you took this path, but it’s kinda sad.

  17. GD says:

    Think Pat’s a comedian? Perhaps this guy can explain it better…

  18. Iain Hall says:

    Damian

    Iain, why are looking to a comedian for insight about one of the world’s most intractable and protracted violent conflicts?

    Truth and good sense are not a monopoly held by the purveyors of disaster porn that you are so fond of, in fact comedians are often an excellent communicators of political truths. I suspect that if Condell was giving us a more “left approved” message you would be praising his wit rather than dismissing him as you do now.

    Surely there are other sources you could consult if you truly sought an understanding of the situation.

    I have followed the machinations of this conflict for forty years or more and I have long thought that the Palestinians have invalidated their claims because of the methods that they have used to promote it, from Hijacking aircraft to killing athletes in Munich they have time and again acted without any honour, they have taken claiming eternal victim hood to new depths. Besides which as I said in the post when faced with an enemy who won’t compromise and who demand your extermination as the only settlement that they will agree to then all that you can do is give THEM death. How this simple logic escapes you is beyond me. But then you are a member of the Namby pamby left aren’t you? That part of the left who thinks that all conflicts can be solved if you sing combyyah enough… 🙄

    As for the image at the foot of your post, well that just reminds us again how far you have lurched in the direction of bigotry. I can’t pinpoint the moment when you took this path, but it’s kinda sad.

    I wish that the sign was a little more specific and that It said “jihadists” rather than “Muslims” but given the context of the post it will serve well enough, that said it is not “bigotry” to call the thugs of Hamas out for their totalitarian and fascist ideology and to suggest that the world would be a far better place (even for Palestinians)if they were all dead. Come on I dare you to demonstrate that you are not making excuses for them as you seem to be doing here.

  19. Iain Hall says:

    Deknarf

    I would argue that its the Palestinians who are fighting on Israel’s turf in this war and as such your comparisons with Vietnam and Afghanistan are quite off the mark but just to suggest that a guerrilla war can never be won because its a guerrilla war is quite wrong as the defeat of the LTTE in Sri Lanka clearly demonstrates.

  20. Damian says:

    Rather than you asking me to “demonstrate” that I am not “making excuses” for Hamas as I “seem to be doing here”, how about you point to the parts of my comment that demonstrate that I am making excuses for anyone? Upon reading it twice you might notice that I don’t do any such thing. Then again, you usually only read what you want to, so chances are you won’t notice anything at all. As I said, it’s all a bit sad.

  21. Iain Hall says:

    Damian
    I read both the text of your comment and the subtext of your political ideology and your oft repeated pro-Islamic commentary when ever any conflict involving followers of the “religion of peace” is discussed.

    As I suggested singing coombyyah won’t cut it in the real world, that you think otherwise is where the real sadness is to found.

  22. deknarf says:

    My understanding is that the Israelis were moved to Palestine after the WW2 as the European solution rather than the Final solution.
    One exception doesn’t disprove the rule. Plus the Sri Lankan episode was countrymen fighting countrymen in their own country. Quite different to Vietnam and Afghanistan which had/have foreign interventions.

  23. Iain Hall says:

    Deknarf

    The Jews have a claim on the land of Israel that goes back many thousands of years and as such they are just as invested in defending that claim as the inhabitants of Vietnam or Afghanistan, from their point of view they too are fighting foreign invaders in their historic homeland. I find it rather strange that when it comes to say the indigenous people of this country our friends form the left are really keen to make the argument that because they were “here first”that they have a permanent and immutable moral claim of ownership fro the real estate yet when it is suggested that the same logic be applied to Israel then they stutter and mutter just like the “Vicky Pollard” character from little Britain!

  24. deknarf says:

    Would suggest that the Palestinians have an equally substantive claim to the same land. So rather than the ‘who was here first’ argument I’d consider that they both have equal rights.
    The behaviour of both sides is untenable and a solution now unresolvable.

  25. Iain Hall says:

    It may offend some people Deknarf but I take the attitude that one can only truly “own” a land when you can exclude other claimants from it, so on this basis the Israelis have the strongest claims to the land between the river Jordan and the Mediterranean sea further as Arabs claimed the land as a right of conquest dating to the time of the rise of Islam it should not be surprising that they should lose the land the same way that they gained it.
    Finally I think that it matters how you fight your battles in this day and age of the world wide web so when the Palestinians allow the totalitarians of Hamas to rule them and to dictate their tactics they lose all credibility IMHO.

  26. deknarf says:

    I think we shall have to agree to disagree Iain!

  27. Iain Hall says:

    I can live with that Deknarf 😉

  28. Damian says:

    We’ve exchanged harsh words before, Iain, but accusing me – without evidence – of sympathising with a terrorist organisation is low even by your pathetic standards. I thought you were mellowing a bit these days, but instead you seem to be getting ever more bitter and hateful. I suppose you do have a reputation to protect – wouldn’t want anyone thinking you’d matured, either intellectually or emotionally. Anyway, unless you’re prepared to stump up some evidence of my “political ideology” and support for Hamas, I seriously suggest you retract the accusation.

  29. Iain Hall says:

    Damian

    We’ve exchanged harsh words before, Iain, but accusing me – without evidence – of sympathising with a terrorist organisation is low even by your pathetic standards.

    I said ” Come on I dare you to demonstrate that you are not making excuses for them as you seem to be doing here.” Notice the word I have emboldened? You offer us the same old rather disingenuous “plague on both of their houses” line on the conflict and now you get upset because I don’t buy it? And on top of that every time I or GD criticise any aspect of Islam You play the racism card as some sort of general shut up and You wonder why I suspect that you sympathise with radical Islam?

    I thought you were mellowing a bit these days, but instead you seem to be getting ever more bitter and hateful.

    I have a darkly sarcastic sense of humour Damian there really is no hate involved at all.

    I suppose you do have a reputation to protect – wouldn’t want anyone thinking you’d matured, either intellectually or emotionally.

    🙄

    Anyway, unless you’re prepared to stump up some evidence of my “political ideology” and support for Hamas, I seriously suggest you retract the accusation.

    Are you prepared to give us a unequivocal condemnation of Hamas, their charter, aims and ideology?

    Finally do you like the picture I dedicated to you at the foot of this post?

  30. GD says:

    Damian casts his one-eyed view over Iain’s post:

    Surely there are other sources you could consult if you truly sought an understanding of the situation. As for the image at the foot of your post, well that just reminds us again how far you have lurched in the direction of bigotry. I can’t pinpoint the moment when you took this path, but it’s kinda sad.

    Dripping with sanctimony, patronisingly presumptuous, you criticise Iain yet offer nothing in the way of argument, reason or debate.

  31. Iain Hall says:

    Dripping with sanctimony, patronisingly presumptuous, you criticise Iain yet offer nothing in the way of argument, reason or debate.

    That’s our Damian to a tee GD 🙂

Comments are closed.

Welcome to the Sandpit

I love a good argument so please leave a comment

Please support the Sandpit

Please support the Sandpit

Do you feel lucky?

Do you feel lucky?

%d bloggers like this: