Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 15
Send Topic Print
WW3? An informed conservative perspective (Read 5448 times)
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 12983
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #30 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:08pm
 
mothra wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 8:26am:
AusGeoff wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 8:21am:
Unfortunately, my attention span doesn't always run to 35 minutes.
particularly for a "talking heads" video.

Is it possible for you to post half a dozen lines explaining the gist
of the interview?

Thanks.     Cool




Apologies for threatening you with a taxation on your valuable time.

May i suggest you sit back and wait and see if anyone else feels compelled to educate themselves about crucial world events and perhaps you can follow a discussion resulting from that?

Apologies, i know of no other way to spoon feed you whilst avoiding making points i would prefer the two gentlemen in the clip to make.



Dear Mothra, I admit I can't the tolerate listening to the fool on the right (in the video), especially with the video  headed "small government and personal liberty" being the basis of his argument.

Please say what he said that you found attractive, to save me 30 mins of agony listening to another conservative  delusonal "individual rights" dummy.

And do you agree the world needs to outlaw war, to avoid WW3 eg would you vote to abolish the veto in UNSC? 


Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
mothra
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 35465
Gender: female
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #31 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:13pm
 
Frank wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:00pm:
Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 11:50am:
Frank wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 11:38am:
mothra wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 11:31am:
freediver wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 11:10am:
Mothra cannot comprehend the possibility that people might still disagree with her after watching the same 30 minute youtube video.


Disagree with me how? I haven't stated my opinion.


mothra wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 7:56am:
This is conservative dialogue i absolutely agree with almost entirely.


So mothra said the dialogue was conservative—said nothing about the substance of the dialogue. JS is right—you are too stupid to work in a University even as janitor.

Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

You missed the bit where she said she agreed with it almost entirely- now highlighted for the Juvenile Wanker community.




What did i agree with, fruitbat? What do you think Israels objectives are?
Back to top
 

If you can't be a good example, you have to be a horrible warning.
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 12983
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #32 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:14pm
 
Mothra? (see my #30)
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 12983
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #33 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:14pm
 
Israel's objective is to survive as a modern state.

But that state was created on land occupied by Palestinians in the former 'Palestine Mandate' area, against the will of the Arab world.

Hence - in the absence of an effective international rules-based system - it's 'game on' ie continuous conflict with Palestinians  since Israel's forceful unilateral declaration of its existence. 


Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:27pm by thegreatdivide »  
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 12983
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #34 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:14pm
 
.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Apr 12th, 2024 at 1:16pm by thegreatdivide »  
 
IP Logged
 
Belgarion
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 5429
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #35 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:34pm
 
mothra wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 7:56am:
Would absolutely love to see constructive comments about the following video. This is conservative dialogue i absolutely agree with almost entirely.

Compelling and brilliantly explored and explained:




Can you just skip to the part where he offers proof that the Jews are putting bombs in toys?
Back to top
 

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Voltaire.....(possibly)
 
IP Logged
 
thegreatdivide
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics<br
/>

Posts: 12983
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #36 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 1:17pm
 
Hmm...I can see why Mothra has got herself into strife with conservatives on this thread.

Like the anti-war stance of the Greens; but they don't want to create the machinery to outlaw war, being beholden to 'national sovereignty'/"freedom" bs.

Doc Evatt was right; you can' have effective international law AND  the UNSC veto. 
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Laugh till you cry
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 16619
In your happy place
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #37 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 1:31pm
 
If Israel is seen as the cause of WW3 will its self-proclaimed right to exist be withdrawn?
Back to top
 

Please don't thank me. Effusive fawning and obeisance of disciples, mendicants, and foot-kissers embarrass me.
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 105390
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #38 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 1:41pm
 
thegreatdivide wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:14pm:
Israel's objective is to survive as a modern state.

But that state was created on land occupied by Palestinians in the former
'Palestine Mandate' area, against the will of the Arab world.

Hence - in the absence of an effective international rules-based system -
it's 'game on' ie continuous conflict with Palestinians  since Israel's forceful unilateral declaration of its existence. 




It can be summed up with one word:   greed.

In fact both sides are greedy -
they both want it all - they don't want to share it.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 46580
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #39 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 1:58pm
 
mothra wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:13pm:
Frank wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 12:00pm:
Jovial Monk wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 11:50am:
Frank wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 11:38am:
mothra wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 11:31am:
freediver wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 11:10am:
Mothra cannot comprehend the possibility that people might still disagree with her after watching the same 30 minute youtube video.


Disagree with me how? I haven't stated my opinion.


mothra wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 7:56am:
This is conservative dialogue i absolutely agree with almost entirely.


So mothra said the dialogue was conservative—said nothing about the substance of the dialogue. JS is right—you are too stupid to work in a University even as janitor.

Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy Cheesy

You missed the bit where she said she agreed with it almost entirely- now highlighted for the Juvenile Wanker community.




What did i agree with, fruitbat? What do you think Israels objectives are?



Well, your thread title is indicates what you think about the interview: informed perspective.
Your opening post also says what you made of it : "This is conservative dialogue i absolutely agree with almost entirely.

So there is 30 minutes of views and ideas and you absolutely agree with almost all of it. So let's say you disagree with 10% of it - 3 minutes, probably one or two ideas.
You are very coy about what these are, though. Still, you yourself said it is informed and you absolutely agree with almost all of it.




Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 74708
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #40 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 3:01pm
 
Frank wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 10:38am:
Nothing new. Macgregor explains larger strategic chessboards.



Like the Israeli land grab
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
Frank
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 46580
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #41 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 3:50pm
 
John Smith wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 3:01pm:
Frank wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 10:38am:
Nothing new. Macgregor explains larger strategic chessboards.



Like the Israeli land grab


During the Six-Day War, in 1967, Israeli forces occupied the Gaza Strip, and in 1970 Israel built the first Israeli settlement in the territory. By 2005 the Gaza Strip had 21 Israeli settlements and about 9,000 Israeli settlers compared with about 1.3 million Palestinians living in the territory. Meanwhile, in 1993 Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) had agreed to a framework for Palestinian self-governance in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (see Oslo Accords). As part of that peace process, Israeli forces withdrew from the city of Gaza in 1994 (as well as from the West Bank city of Jericho) and transferred civilian functions for the city to the newly created Palestinian Authority (PA). But concerns over Israel’s security derailed the peace process, especially because of violence from religious nationalists on both sides. At the turn of the century, negotiations came to a virtual halt with the outbreak of the second intifada (2000–05).

Despite the impasse, the cost of occupying the Gaza Strip weighed heavily on the Israeli public, especially amid rising casualties among soldiers who were deployed to defend the settlements. In 2002 the idea of evacuating the settlements before negotiations recommenced was floated by the leader of the Israel Labor Party, then the largest party on the Israeli left. In 2003 Prime Minister Ariel Sharon embraced the idea, despite strong opposition within his own Likud Party. That December, Sharon unveiled a plan for the complete removal of Israeli settlers and soldiers from the Gaza Strip. At the insistence of the United States, the plan later included the evacuation of four small settlements in the West Bank.

On August 15, 2005, when the deadline for evacuation had passed, only about two-thirds of all the settlers had left their homes and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) notified the remaining settlers that soldiers would begin enforcing the evacuation order two days later. Most of the remaining settlers agreed to leave when prompted by the soldiers, but some resisted and were carried away, sometimes screaming. The most dramatic evacuation was in Kfar Darom, where soldiers broke through a barricade in a synagogue and removed some 200 residents despite violent protest. On August 22 the IDF reached an agreement with residents of Netzarim, the last of the settlers in the Gaza Strip, whereby they agreed to evacuate after a final prayer service in the local synagogue. In the weeks that followed, Israeli forces demolished residential buildings and dismantled military installations and completed their withdrawal on September 12.



Some land grab.

Back to top
 

Estragon: I can’t go on like this.
Vladimir: That’s what you think.
 
IP Logged
 
Belgarion
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 5429
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #42 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 5:02pm
 
Frank wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 3:50pm:
John Smith wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 3:01pm:
[quote author=Frank link=1712872603/16#16 date=1712882323]
Nothing new. Macgregor explains larger strategic chessboards.


During the Six-Day War, in 1967, Israeli forces occupied the Gaza Strip, and in 1970 Israel built the first Israeli settlement in the territory. By 2005 the Gaza Strip had 21 Israeli settlements and about 9,000 Israeli settlers compared with about 1.3 million Palestinians living in the territory. Meanwhile, in 1993 Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) had agreed to a framework for Palestinian self-governance in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank (see Oslo Accords). As part of that peace process, Israeli forces withdrew from the city of Gaza in 1994 (as well as from the West Bank city of Jericho) and transferred civilian functions for the city to the newly created Palestinian Authority (PA). But concerns over Israel’s security derailed the peace process, especially because of violence from religious nationalists on both sides. At the turn of the century, negotiations came to a virtual halt with the outbreak of the second intifada (2000–05).

Despite the impasse, the cost of occupying the Gaza Strip weighed heavily on the Israeli public, especially amid rising casualties among soldiers who were deployed to defend the settlements. In 2002 the idea of evacuating the settlements before negotiations recommenced was floated by the leader of the Israel Labor Party, then the largest party on the Israeli left. In 2003 Prime Minister Ariel Sharon embraced the idea, despite strong opposition within his own Likud Party. That December, Sharon unveiled a plan for the complete removal of Israeli settlers and soldiers from the Gaza Strip. At the insistence of the United States, the plan later included the evacuation of four small settlements in the West Bank.

On August 15, 2005, when the deadline for evacuation had passed, only about two-thirds of all the settlers had left their homes and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) notified the remaining settlers that soldiers would begin enforcing the evacuation order two days later. Most of the remaining settlers agreed to leave when prompted by the soldiers, but some resisted and were carried away, sometimes screaming. The most dramatic evacuation was in Kfar Darom, where soldiers broke through a barricade in a synagogue and removed some 200 residents despite violent protest. On August 22 the IDF reached an agreement with residents of Netzarim, the last of the settlers in the Gaza Strip, whereby they agreed to evacuate after a final prayer service in the local synagogue. In the weeks that followed, Israeli forces demolished residential buildings and dismantled military installations and completed their withdrawal on September 12.



Some land grab.




Do not the the truth get in the way of bogus victimhood.
Back to top
 

"I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."

Voltaire.....(possibly)
 
IP Logged
 
Jasin
Gold Member
*****
Online



Posts: 48728
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #43 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 5:54pm
 
Eat shyte Smith you turd muncher.  Grin
Back to top
 

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.
 
IP Logged
 
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 74708
Gender: male
Re: WW3? An informed conservative perspective
Reply #44 - Apr 12th, 2024 at 7:45pm
 
Frank wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 3:50pm:
John Smith wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 3:01pm:
Frank wrote on Apr 12th, 2024 at 10:38am:
Nothing new. Macgregor explains larger strategic chessboards.



Like the Israeli land grab


Some land grab.



With 33000+ dead and climbing, mostly women and children,  it certainly is some land grab. 
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 ... 15
Send Topic Print