Why would Israel attack Iran?

Nothing you've shown me proves that the media is more biased than I already knew. It doesn't take much to believe in media bias. But it does take quite a leap in logic to extrapolate from that belief another belief that Israel = bad, Arabs = good. Completely unsupported conclusion.

 
knapplc said:
Nothing you've shown me proves that the media is more biased than I already knew. It doesn't take much to believe in media bias. But it does take quite a leap in logic to extrapolate from that belief another belief that Israel = bad, Arabs = good. Completely unsupported conclusion.
Click to expand...

So you knew it was as bad as to promote the lie of "Arrafat walked away from 99% of what he wanted"(paraphrased)? You knew there were biased enough to promote that lie..and not tell how those negotiations actually ended?

It seems you don't care about degrees. THe media is biased so it doesn't matter to what degree they are. The Arabs have done bad...and so have Israel...it doesn't matter to what degree each has.

It all seems like a cop out to me...which can be very convenient if you're on the right "side".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm sorry, I'm just not as emotionally invested in this as you. The whole point of my conversation was to whittle the nonsense away to the point where we could agree that each side had valid points and each side had done wrong. If you want to quibble over who's MORE wrong, knock yourself out.

 
knapplc said:
I'm sorry, I'm just not as emotionally invested in this as you. The whole point of my conversation was to whittle the nonsense away to the point where we could agree that each side had valid points and each side had done wrong. If you want to quibble over who's MORE wrong, knock yourself out.
Click to expand...
So is that how all conflicts should be discussed? Is there any conflict where one side is lily white? Are you going to hold this standard for all conflicts you discuss?

 
Cactusboy said:
knapplc said:
I'm sorry, I'm just not as emotionally invested in this as you. The whole point of my conversation was to whittle the nonsense away to the point where we could agree that each side had valid points and each side had done wrong. If you want to quibble over who's MORE wrong, knock yourself out.
Click to expand...
So is that how all conflicts should be discussed? Is there any conflict where one side is lily white? Are you going to hold this standard for all conflicts you discuss?
Click to expand...
It's a case-by-case basis, of course.

 
knapplc said:
Cactusboy said:
knapplc said:
I'm sorry, I'm just not as emotionally invested in this as you. The whole point of my conversation was to whittle the nonsense away to the point where we could agree that each side had valid points and each side had done wrong. If you want to quibble over who's MORE wrong, knock yourself out.
Click to expand...
So is that how all conflicts should be discussed? Is there any conflict where one side is lily white? Are you going to hold this standard for all conflicts you discuss?
Click to expand...
It's a case-by-case basis, of course.
Click to expand...

So you pick and choose or is there some sort of criteria?

US vs Al Qaeda. How do you rule that one?

 
knapplc said:
Cactusboy said:
MLB 51 said:
Once again Cactusboy, which side is right?
Click to expand...

I answered this before...maybe to you even. You can go back and look for it if you want.
Click to expand...
This question has not been answered in this thread, unless I missed it.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure I answered it or a similar one earlier. Besides it's obviously a loaded question, w/ no honest/good intent.

MLB is the same one that said Britain gave the land to the Arabs and it belonged to Israel. and he never answered my reply to that.

http://www.huskerboard.com/index.php?/topic/57769-why-would-israel-attack-iran/page__view__findpost__p__918895

 
Back
Top