EasternVol
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 18, 2021
- Messages
- 8,184
- Likes
- 6,191
We're talking about something that happened 20 years ago. You're the one who brought it up.Have you not accused them of trying to steal Gaza currently? Now you’re saying it’s just not worth it?
View attachment 630010
20 years ago it was heavily populated and built up. Today the infrastructure is wrecked. It looks like Israel is trying to make it uninhabitable. Again, you're the one who brought up events of 20 years ago.Lmfao. So 20 years ago it lacked utility, but today you believe they are trying to stealing the land?
20 years ago it was heavily populated and built up. Today the infrastructure is wrecked. It looks like Israel is trying to make it uninhabitable. Again, you're the one who brought up events of 20 years ago.
I don't think that's applicable to this conversation.Let’s end this bull ****.
You said Israel (a Jewish nation with Jewish leaders) steals land by its nature.
![]()
What to Know About Nature vs. Nurture
Nature vs. nurture is an age-old psychology debate. Learn the role of genetics and environment in personality and child development, examples, and how they interact.www.verywellmind.com
Do you stand by that statement?
Because what you’re describing is “a history of”
Which I’ve repeatedly asked you to accept in rejecting your unintentional antisemitism. Unintentional is still antisemitism.
I understand your points. And, I agree with them.If they still took the land in the first place that would be "stealing". whatever is meant by that.
just because they found out after the fact the land wasn't usable, or they tried to give it to a third party doesn't make it not "stealing".
I steal something from the store, go home, try to use, find out it doesn't work, and then go back to the store to return it; I still stole it originally.
I steal something, then try to give it to someone else beyond the rightful owner, its still stealing.
you don't have to maintain possession of an object in order to have stolen it in the first place. a change of heart later doesn't undo the original action.
all that gets a lot more tricky if the usage of "stolen" means "annexed" or something else, but it could still apply as well.
if an HOA annexes my neighborhood, I may still own my house, but that HOA is now dictating the terms and conditions of my usage of my own house.
and this all assumes Israel nor Palestine/Gaza had a property tax that worked similar to over here. Maybe the land/building owner outright owned their property, Israel comes in, assesses property tax, and then can later take the land or building? I would call that stealing, regardless of how Israel claimed that land.
His claim was based on specific utility (cost), not that it lacked any utility.You claimed it lacked utility and was unusable. That’s not true. That much coastal land has great utility.
That emotional component to whatever extent it exists was there when Israel sent the settlers in and then evacuated them. That hand has been played.It seems to me like you are overlooking the emotional component of the relationship between Israel and Hamas in your answer. I don't think the emotional has been (or can be) separated.
You're using I think a wrong definition of the word 'nature'. In this context it means an inclination or disposition or temperament. It doesn't mean you have an uncontrollable urge (Devo?) to steal anything and everything.I understand your points. And, I agree with them.
If it is my nature to steal land, and I steal it not, then my nature is misrepresented.
Have we had a discussion about the settlements brought to the conversation? I don't know the history of the settlement, why it was chosen, how it was acquired, etc.
That’s a lot of spin to justify looking like a pos.I don't think that's applicable to this conversation.
What I wrote was "Land theft is their nature", speaking of Israel government policy. Here are Merriam-Webster's definitions for the noun nature:
1: the external world in its entirety
2: natural scenery
3 a: disposition, temperament
b: the inherent character or basic constitution of a person or thing: essence
4 a: humankind's original or natural condition
b: a simplified mode of life resembling this condition
5: a kind or class usually distinguished by fundamental or essential characteristics 6: the physical constitution or drives of an organism
7: the genetically controlled qualities of an organism
8 a: a creative and controlling force in the universe
b: an inner force (such as instinct, appetite, desire) or the sum of such forces in an individual
9: a spontaneous attitude (as of generosity)
3a is the applicable definition.
I could have written that exact sentence with regard to the US in 1900 and it would have been as completely lacking in racism toward WASPs as my earlier post was toward Jews.