Reply #19: You Are Very Predictable, Mr. Bunter [View All]

[DoveTurnedHawk]

Now, how do these words 'neatly eviscerate my premise?' Israel has agreed to land for peace exactly once,

Hey, there's one gesture of peace by Israel! And not just a trifling one, either, it was a huge mass of land!

and that was only after the Egyptians went to war to try to force the return of their own land.

A war which Egypt lost once again. Israel was in no military danger whatsoever from Egypt when they negotiated the Sinai back to them.

First, that's one instance in a long history.

Hey, just like the Sinai! I guess that makes two! Sooner or later, those gestures of peace by Israel just start adding up, don't they?

Thank you very much. Statements like these make it very easy to dismiss your arguments as the one-sided propaganda of a partisan, rather than someone interested in a fair discussion.

More, from the person who cries about ad-hominems. :/

As you might say, I thought I was just making a statement of fact?

The last I heard, forcibly evicting people from their homes and land was an act of war; shelling in return is considered an appropriate response.

So I'm sure you have no problem, then, with the Israelis making war in 1967 because of the Egyptian naval blockade, which is considered a classic casus belli?

I suppose this is an example of intellectual honesty. Maybe that's why I have such a problem with it.

I'm really glad you're able to admit this. That's the first step in getting better, you know.

I see. So the Syrians want their land back, and refuse to agree to peace without getting their land, but both sides are equally to blame.

For the condition of war that has existed between them for decades? Yes, absolutely both sides are to blame.

As for the strategic value of Golan, it's nonsense. Several Israeli generals have said so, and they captured Golan as an afterthought during the Six Days War.

Nonsense? You are no student of military affairs, if you dispute the strategic value of the Golan.

And please show me these Israeli generals statements. I would like to see the context of your claims. Regardless, so long as the Israeli people perceive strategic value in the Golan, the reality is that turning it over as part of any peace plan will be very difficult, if not impossible. I prefer to deal in realities, rather than idle wishes. And as I've said, no party in this conflict is an innocent.

Ahh, now I remember, I even remember you. You're the guy who was proud to be described as a sycophant.

The Magistrate is the best treasure this discussion board has to offer, and I certainly have no qualms whatsoever offering him my unqualified support and adulation, it's true. :-)

At any rate, I wasn't aware that I had 'fared badly' on that forum,

Of course you weren't, dear.

I do recall the comment in question. Your hero was reduced to pretending I'd 'promised' an essay when I'd done no such thing, because he had no arguments to offer.

The Magistrate had no arguments to offer? I love how you dig yourself in deeper with every sentence. Even several of your own compatriots on the "pro-Palestinian" side would disagree vehemently with you, there.

By the way, and I don't mean this as an insult or a personal attack,

Sure ya don't, Billy. :-)

Yet you remember details from a discussion several months ago, in which you were, at best, a bit player.

That I do indeed remember clearly those details should give you some idea of the sheer magnitude of your defeat in this Forum.

As a complete aside, are you sure your priorities in life are in order? It's a serious question. Obviously, I don't expect, or even want, an answer here, but it's something you might want to think about.

LOL. For once, I'm not going to argue with you, as I've previously spent hundreds of hours of my free time participating and helping to moderate this message board, and that probably is indeed just a little bit out-of-whack with respect to priorities.

Regardless, however, I am quite satisfied with my life, and have achieved certain objective indicia of success, so I guess it hasn't hurt me too badly.

In any event, you have once again done exactly as I had hoped: your tone alone, not to mention your words, have exposed you as the rabid partisan you are, attempting vainly to pass yourself off as an unbiased observer.

I am quite confident that is why you spend no time down here, with people on both sides who know as much as or more than you on these issues. You're much more interested in trying to spread your biased view of the conflict to people "upstairs" who are less likely to call you on your inaccuracies, than being subjected to another humiliating defeat by the learned members of this forum.

Thanks again for doing as I'd hoped you would.

DTH