Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
Sure.
Not as a theocracy, though. Theocratic rule has demonstrated that it's fundamentally undemocratic and seems to me to be antithetical to freedom and equality. And not without consequences for human rights violations. And not with financial aid from my country (we're in a pretty bad way with money at the moment). And within the borders they agreed to in the 1960s.
But sure, Israel can exist.
|
You mean like half of the Arab nations that are so entrenched in the Islamic faith, those kind of theocracies?
But I absolutely agree with you Willravel, NO nation, no peoples, should EVER be forced to suffer under autocracy and/or theocracy, and when combined they form the most anti-humane, self-indulgent form of tyranny know to mankind.
---------- Post added at 03:18 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:07 PM ----------
O.K. let me just ask this so I can understand, why is the hamas not looked upon as the aggressor here, as the tyrannical dictatorship over the Palestinian people, why are we not seeing the forest through the trees, imo, what am I missing that I seem to be the only one that talks about the hamas' role in all of this?