schopenhauer1

Ha, this is a true statement.

You know how I'm going to answer though, right? Let's say my other arguments are on the table here...

Again, I don't see how this addresses my concern that you are just saying (more subtly), don't question existence itself. That is to say, the enterpri...

To not acknowledge that we "could do otherwise", even survival itself, is to be inauthentic. You would be arbitrarily using the justification of, "but...

How is that claim true? That’s tim wood’s opinion put in the language of fact.

If we are talking hypotheticals anyways, the ability to never have been born into the society in the first place. True freedom right there. Anything e...

We are the only animal that has the extra burden of justifying our own survival. I would ignore most posts that say something like “most people don’t ...

:clap: Is it any better living day to day self sufficient though? Eating grubs and chasing the next meal?

I'm liking the Schopenhauer :up: .. And Benatar ain't bad either, darth.

I'm going to take a more abstract (philosophical?) stance on WWII. I think WWII (mainly German Nazism, Italian Fascism, and Japanese nationalism) and ...

But I think people are saying that I think. It’s as if experience wins some sort of points for some reason over non experience. As we’ve agreed, that ...

To further make the point, let's say there were these two scenarios: 1) A universe devoid of any experience. No people working, maintaining, entertain...

But your contention was: We may not want to live. We only can know life, true, but to want it over some imaginative other thing (like not having to do...

But other life does it unthinkingly. We know how life perpetuates and can even prevent it. It wouldn't be enough to say, "That's just what humans do" ...

Absolutely agree. You’ve actually managed to sum up my points in my last few posts better than I so kudos. I was first seeing If the indignity went bo...

Give up Right of Return. Give up big settlements in West Bank. Make sure things like assassinations (Rabin) and increasing suicide bombings (Hamas/Hez...

What do you do if the militants who are shooting into Israel disappear into civilian populations? I am not saying bomb indiscriminately, but just in t...

@"BitconnectCarlos" In an imaginary world where all Palestinian factions decided 1967 borders were acceptable and right of return was stricken from th...

Trying to align it.. Correct me when you're rested. Baden: No Baden: Yes If this is the case, are you of the mind that Hamas/Palestinians are justifie...

Can you quote which particular questions you are answering in the "original edited post" (is that the first in the recent exchange)? I can't quite ali...

By the way, how did my response get positioned before yours? Haha

I mean you can just say, "edit your responses to be more clear". Not sure if you are trying to say that in a clever way or something.

NO I just like to get my reply out without editing. I go back and edit later. As I did even before you pointed that out.

I'm not getting your point. I used the term "violence".. You were more specific that you were against "targeting civilians" which is more specific. Th...

As an experiment, you should start a thread and see how many unenthusiastic responses you get for it. You'll get your answer. Or rather, just see how ...

What do you want me to agree with? Specific, and then I went a bit further.. Now are you reading the full posts?

Yes, targeting civilians.. So as long as its military force its a-ok. Got it. So not violence in general, only towards military targets.. And I would ...

No, not falling for the bait.. Now you're trying to have some caveat..things that I address (even if you have less weapons).. You brought up ideas of ...

What's the point of saying this? If it's because you are trying to say, "How can you not have interpreted me as being UNEQUIVOCALLY against Hamas' act...

Cool, so my conclusion is correct then here: And we can leave it at that. I have no problem if that is your view.

Are you not okay with the conclusions I have made? No, I don't see a "rather" in that sentence. That alone is a strong condemnation.. It was this one ...

You said: Sorry not rather not, but just "rather" same thing based on the context of that sentence with the use of "justified in fighting"... which is...

Yes, "Rather not" in any use in the English language is pretty damn wishy washy. It's not a strong condemnation, so it counters (a bit) the other clai...

Ok, well you had a varying views there, so you can see why it's confusing.. Again, kind of wishy washy. So just to circle back to the OP's phrasing fo...

Yes I saw that. But the key word was "rather see" which is REALLY hard to nail down there. Sounds like you are okay with it cause rather not is not mu...

Ok, that's what I wanted to know. So what part is justified, exactly what we are seeing from Hamas/fighters over the last 30 years?

@"StreetlightX"@"Benkei"@"BitconnectCarlos"@"ssu"@"Baden" Just curious. And I think this is completely valid in this particular thread as everyone has...

This has some information too:

Not sure if this informs one way or the other:

They wouldn't have been murdered surely if they just went to US, Canada, and UK, no?

But surely they should have just went to US, Canada, and the UK and foregone Israel, no? As @"Judaka" and others are claiming, these are ecumenical co...

Surely after WWII, the dispossessed Jews should just reclaim their homes in Germany, Poland, Hungary, Ukraine, and such right? What to do with the dis...

So @"Judaka"'s contention is that no nation should ever be built for ethnic historical reasons. Case closed for Israel.

Again, this goes both ways.. The victors can make whatever positive narrative they want for themselves. Who is going to say otherwise? Multiculturalis...

I honestly don't give a shit. I was arguing that ethnic histories do matter. I think I made my point. Look I agree with you that inclusivity is the wa...

When you wipe out all the enemies and let the remainders in under the idea of equality... sure makes all the sense in the world.

Again, why not a tribal chieftain government ruling Australia.. at least half and half? Why would that be moronic? It's truly being inclusive.

Being ethnically inclusive is not power sharing. Why not let the remaining tribal chiefs of Aborigine run the government? The ones that are left. And ...

All good points.. This stemmed out of Judaka claiming thus: It's basically surrounding ethnic histories being "barely talked about" as if the West is ...