Log in

No account? Create an account
Black Intellects
Did the Zionists have the legal or moral right to invade Arab… 
21st-Oct-2008 04:28 pm
Did the Zionists have the legal or moral right to invade Arab Palestine, uproot its Arab citizens from their homes and seize all Arab property for themselves just based on the "religious" claim that their forefathers lived there thousands of years ago? Only a thousand years ago the Moors lived in Spain. Would this give the Moors of today the legal and moral right to invade the Iberian Peninsula, drive out its Spanish citizens, and then set up a new Moroccan nation ... where Spain used to be, as the European zionists have done to our Arab brothers and sisters in Palestine

from Malcolm X Zionist Speech

i dont know How people will react to this
I am a Black Muslim and this made me think
21st-Oct-2008 11:45 pm (UTC)
The problem is that who's right and wrong are you using? Are we using 21st century American Standards? If so are we using 21st Century Republican rule of the past 8 years standards, or something else?

Are you using 1960's American right and wrong? Who's legality are you using? There is never a complete "Legal" right to invade another country. Who;s laws are you using?

This is a common issue I think. What gives anyone the moral or legal right to invade another country. And if it is payback as Malcolm suggests, do 2 wrongs really make a right?

Just a thought.....
22nd-Oct-2008 02:49 am (UTC)
At some point it becomes a moot point.

If you go back far enough you see that every country was taken over by another. There is no good that comes from fighting a 100 year war for another 100 years.

One of these days everyone has to say, "Enough is enough, everybody stay where you are so we can all get along peacefully."...
23rd-Oct-2008 08:29 am (UTC)
The State of Israel was established by the United Nations (not Zionist invaders), and was immediately attacked on all sides. Israel's present territory was won through wars in which Israel was defending itself, and Israel gave back the Sinai peninsula in a peace treaty with Egypt.

If you follow the argument above to its ultimate conclusion, not only are most nations on Earth (very much including the United States!) morally and legally illegitimate, but the only "legitimate" nation in the world would be China, which has been a (relatively speaking) consistent civilization for over two millennia.
24th-Oct-2008 08:30 pm (UTC)
Does anyone ever have the legal or moral right to invade anyone else, and if so, exactly how are those rights obtained?
24th-Oct-2008 10:21 pm (UTC)
i dont think anyone has the right to invade another country ever unless the country posses a threat at the time
24th-Oct-2008 11:09 pm (UTC)
Well, plenty of countries pose a threat to other countries (the US poses a threat to several). Does that give every country that claims a threat is being posed to it by another the moral or legal right to invade another country? I don't think so.

If some country invades another country, the country being invaded has the right to defend itself, including counter-invading the invading country as a defense measure. Of course, the new concept of "preemptive war" flies in the face of this, but it's a flawed concept, since (as we have seen in the Iraq war), the justification for such a "preemptive war" can be manufactured.
25th-Oct-2008 12:04 am (UTC)
well what about georgia and russia who was right there
or what about kuwait should they have attacked iraq first
25th-Oct-2008 12:36 am (UTC)
I'm not really familiar enough with the Georgia/Russia conflict to comment on it, quite honestly, but from what I know of it, I don't think either side was "right." Then again, it's not really a clear-cut situation.

As far as Kuwait goes, though, no, of course they shouldn't have attacked Iraq first (did you actually read the post above, wherein I stated that the concept of "preemptive war" is highly flawed?). Kuwait posed no threat to Iraq. Iraq shouldn't have invaded Kuwait, either, but they did, since they wanted Kuwait's oil fields, and they were wrong to do that. Since Iraq did invade Kuwait, Kuwait naturally had every right to defend itself.

In other words, you don't bother me, I won't bother you. However, if you commit violence against me and invade my land, I'll fight back and make you wish you'd never crossed me, but I don't have the right to invade your land and commit violence against you just because I think you're going to do that to me. If we follow the logic of "get them before they get you" we'll be one extinct species before long, and that's a zero-sum game I have no interest in playing.
27th-Oct-2008 02:49 pm (UTC)
"In other words, you don't bother me, I won't bother you. However, if you commit violence against me and invade my land, I'll fight back and make you wish you'd never crossed me"
Thats what they are doing in iraq but we call them terrorists and say they are are bad evil people but what right do we have to be there?
27th-Oct-2008 09:49 pm (UTC)
What do you mean "we," brother? Neither you nor I are in Iraq, and I don't call Iraqis who are against the invasion "terrorists," nor do I consider them to be "bad evil people."

I think you may have me confused with the Bush Administration and its supporters. Let me correct you on that mistaken assumption.

The United States of America doesn't have any right to be in Iraq. It was neither invited, nor was it attacked by Iraq. Iraq was unjustly invaded based on a lie for the purposes of establishing American hegemony in the region, while the oil companies benefit. I do not support this imperialist policy.
29th-Oct-2008 08:48 pm (UTC)
sorry. when i say we i mean americans
in general. i live in a white town, were most of the people think that we are in iraq for freedom. and if we didnt attack them they would have attacked us
29th-Oct-2008 09:11 pm (UTC)
Might want to consider moving to some place where the people actually possess intelligence.
This page was loaded Jul 23rd 2019, 11:03 am GMT.