NationStates Jolt Archive

Which side in this conflict do you support? Israel, returning to the land it hadn't owned for centuries, but is now fully entrenched in? The Palestinians, whom lived in the land, and largely still do, but never owned it?

Furthermore, whose policies are worse? The terroristic attacks by Palestine, or are those just the consequences of Israel's repressive policies, and its ignoring of international law (such as the many assassinations it has committed in other nations such as Brazil, Morocco, etc, without informing that nation's government of its plans).


Let the debate begin!


Oh, and if you plan to write about either towel-heads, sand-lovers, or jew comments, then leave now, we don't need that.

Nyeyzus...the phrase 'can of worms' was made for this subject. :P

To say that i support either side would be to suggest that i condone violence and i dont so i wont. Having said that i think that the Israeli confrontational approach is never going to solve anything. Violence breeds misery wherever and by whomever it is applied.

go to http://www.factsofisrael.com/en/history.shtml. It outlines some very interesting facts.

go to http://www.factsofisrael.com/en/history.shtml. It outlines some very interesting facts.

That link doesnt seem to work

Whose perspective is that sight written from?

I'd have to say that I tend to sympathize (yet not really support) more with the Palestinian people. They could live very good lives instead of being cramped into refugee camps if Israel could just maybe lighten its policies

If you ask me the only way to end the conflict is to re-appoint Mahmoud Abbas as Palestinian PM, remove Arafat's control over securtiy, and re-elect Ehmud Barak (sp?) as Israeli PM. Those two people, IMHO, are the best chance of peace in the region.

Oh btw I have a Jewish friend who can't stand Israel's Sharon either. He's thinking of forming a group known as JAZZ (Jews Against Zany Zoinists)

I'd have to say that I tend to sympathize (yet not really support) more with the Palestinian people. They could live very good lives instead of being cramped into refugee camps if Israel could just maybe lighten its policies

If you ask me the only way to end the conflict is to re-appoint Mahmoud Abbas as Palestinian PM, remove Arafat's control over securtiy, and re-elect Ehmud Barak (sp?) as Israeli PM. Those two people, IMHO, are the best chance of peace in the region.

Oh btw I have a Jewish friend who can't stand Israel's Sharon either. He's thinking of forming a group known as JAZZ (Jews Against Zany Zoinists)

I think I have to agree. Though the Brits do bear some responsibility in all of this. They left without so much as setting up a safe zone for the Palestinians.

Which side in this conflict do you support? Israel, returning to the land it hadn't owned for centuries, but is now fully entrenched in? The Palestinians, whom lived in the land, and largely still do, but never owned it?

Furthermore, whose policies are worse? The terroristic attacks by Palestine, or are those just the consequences of Israel's repressive policies, and its ignoring of international law (such as the many assassinations it has committed in other nations such as Brazil, Morocco, etc, without informing that nation's government of its plans).


Let the debate begin!


Oh, and if you plan to write about either towel-heads, sand-lovers, or jew comments, then leave now, we don't need that.

this is a very logical thread. and, i hope that SOME people dont come in here with anti-semitic or anti-islamic reasons.
anyways, i voted for israel. no, mr. terrorist from the other post i was on, i am not jewish, it is just that israel has a better cause. first, you all have to understand that israel has rights to well... um... israel. in 1948, israel was declared as a real country,therefore, the israelies have the right to have a pro-west democracy. and what you ll have to understabd is, that the israelies never began their opressive actions against palestinians, untill AFTER the evi terrorists began to kill inocent israeli woman and children, and then began to hide behind innocent palestinians. the gunners {not bombbers} would hide in palestinian homes, afgter they would murder israeli woman and small children in cold blood. {remember what happened int he kibbutz[am i spelling that right?] were an evil terrorist gunner went into the kibbutz, which provided work for the palestinians, and went into a guy's home, and killed his wife, as well as fiveyear old daughter. then the bastard took his gun, and pointed it to a baby only a few month old, head and pulled the trigger. then the gunner hid in the palestinian village. for years the jews of the kibbutz protected the village fromt he israeli court, and gave them work and charity. but some ungrateful aplestinian hid th egunner. and when no one in the village would give up that person's name, the israeli soldiers closed the village off. even thought he palestinians were present at the family's funeral} israel has the right to defend themeselves, though they dont have the right to build settlements on palestinian land. but, i did go to israel to visit my missionary aunt {though shes a catholic,a nd ima protestant, we still have connections} we went to a druiz village and beduin {did i speel it right?} village, a found no israeli soldier in sight.that is becaus ethe druiz and beduin dont harbor terror, and respect their neighbors. for that, they are free to leave town and go anywere they want, at any time, any day. we spent the day there, and i met the locals, who are cool people. this shows that israel doesnt just oppress muslims for no reason as some people claim. i still hope that israel will stop making jewish settlements on palestinianlands, and i hopoe that the palestinians will no longer follow terrorists like yasser arafat's words.

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

I think I would have to lean toward supporting the Palestinians (although I do not agree with violence of either side) because I believe that what we know as "Israel" is actually Palestinian land. The nation of Israel was made by Britain and the U.S. as a place to hold military in the Middle East and monitor the Middle-Eastern nations. Now, that wouldn't have been such a bad idea if Britain and the U.S. had negotiated with Palestine to set-up borders for a sort of American Embassy-like thing in Palestine. However, they drew lines on a map and called it "Israel". Now there is a dillema because both Israelis and Palestinians are fighting for the land which is, consequently, "holy land" for their respective cultures. To make matters worse, the U.S. supported Israel and used their military to keep Palestinian uprisign at bay. This was probably the first occurence that led to the idea of Americans being "devils", as is the common portrayal throughout the Middle East today. If America really does want peace in the Middle East, the first thing it has to do is pull its troops out and give the Palestinians their land back (almost sounds like the Native American history lesson, now doesn't it?) Well, that's MY opinion, so say what you like.

I agree with Palestine wanting their area back and them not wanting the Israelis building an apartheid wall. The Israelis want land for a Jewish homeland, good. They have it. Now, why dont they let the Muslim's have their land. Yes, some of the Palestinians are extremists, but they have a right to be angry. It seems like the conflict will never end, no side will ever be happy with any outcome.

Who are you quoting when you put quotation marks 'round 'devils'?

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

no. i am not. i dont even know why i worte pro-west democracy. i know that they are, but i didnt mean it like they deserve to exist anymore than palestine. i just am sying that israel is an official nation. palestine is not. and untill i see palestine as one, i will not reconize it as a country.

Israel.

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

no. i am not. i dont even know why i worte pro-west democracy. i know that they are, but i didnt mean it like they deserve to exist anymore than palestine. i just am sying that israel is an official nation. palestine is not. and untill i see palestine as one, i will not reconize it as a country.

I don't even recognize Palestine as a state.

I think I would have to lean toward supporting the Palestinians (although I do not agree with violence of either side) because I believe that what we know as "Israel" is actually Palestinian land. The nation of Israel was made by Britain and the U.S. as a place to hold military in the Middle East and monitor the Middle-Eastern nations. Now, that wouldn't have been such a bad idea if Britain and the U.S. had negotiated with Palestine to set-up borders for a sort of American Embassy-like thing in Palestine. However, they drew lines on a map and called it "Israel". Now there is a dillema because both Israelis and Palestinians are fighting for the land which is, consequently, "holy land" for their respective cultures. To make matters worse, the U.S. supported Israel and used their military to keep Palestinian uprisign at bay. This was probably the first occurence that led to the idea of Americans being "devils", as is the common portrayal throughout the Middle East today. If America really does want peace in the Middle East, the first thing it has to do is pull its troops out and give the Palestinians their land back (almost sounds like the Native American history lesson, now doesn't it?) Well, that's MY opinion, so say what you like.
Um...sorry to blow your anti-American bubble here, but the Americans had virtually no involvement in Israel's actual creation. It was created by the English and French following WW2 as they had colonial mandates in the area, and left. Secondly, America sold weapons to Israel, but never used its own soldiers against Palestine.

Honestly, read some history on the subject, your obviously conjecturing off of incorrect information.

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

no. i am not. i dont even know why i worte pro-west democracy. i know that they are, but i didnt mean it like they deserve to exist anymore than palestine. i just am sying that israel is an official nation. palestine is not. and untill i see palestine as one, i will not reconize it as a country.

I thought that palestine is an official nation. If its not, its darn close to being official. Its an observer country in the UN.

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

no. i am not. i dont even know why i worte pro-west democracy. i know that they are, but i didnt mean it like they deserve to exist anymore than palestine. i just am sying that israel is an official nation. palestine is not. and untill i see palestine as one, i will not reconize it as a country.

I thought that palestine is an official nation. If its not, its darn close to being official. Its an observer country in the UN.

Because the UN is anti... nm I'm not one of those people!

Although i agree with the idea that there's no point in referring to 'Palestine' when it doesn't exist, i don't think that's what the debate is about.

http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=Israel&q2=Palestine&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us

According to this, Israel.

-----------------------------------------
R j00 b45h|n9 m3j3 6r4mm4r, ph45c|57?
Free your mind! (http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bright/berkman/comanarchism/whatis_toc.html)
I like big butts!
http://img63.photobucket.com/albums/v193/eddy_the_great/steatopygia.jpg

Although i agree with the idea that there's no point in referring to 'Palestine' when it doesn't exist, i don't think that's what the debate is about.

i know and agree. i am just telling a person that i do not think that israel has more rights to be a nation than palestine.

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

no. i am not. i dont even know why i worte pro-west democracy. i know that they are, but i didnt mean it like they deserve to exist anymore than palestine. i just am sying that israel is an official nation. palestine is not. and untill i see palestine as one, i will not reconize it as a country.

I thought that palestine is an official nation. If its not, its darn close to being official. Its an observer country in the UN.

naw. sorry. it never was either.

this is a very logical thread. and, i hope that SOME people dont come in here with anti-semitic or anti-islamic reasons.
anyways, i voted for israel. no, mr. terrorist from the other post i was on, i am not jewish, it is just that israel has a better cause. first, you all have to understand that israel has rights to well... um... israel. in 1948, israel was declared as a real country,therefore, the israelies have the right to have a pro-west democracy. and what you ll have to understabd is, that the israelies never began their opressive actions against palestinians, untill AFTER the evi terrorists began to kill inocent israeli woman and children, and then began to hide behind innocent palestinians. the gunners {not bombbers} would hide in palestinian homes, afgter they would murder israeli woman and small children in cold blood. {remember what happened int he kibbutz[am i spelling that right?] were an evil terrorist gunner went into the kibbutz, which provided work for the palestinians, and went into a guy's home, and killed his wife, as well as fiveyear old daughter. then the bastard took his gun, and pointed it to a baby only a few month old, head and pulled the trigger. then the gunner hid in the palestinian village. for years the jews of the kibbutz protected the village fromt he israeli court, and gave them work and charity. but some ungrateful aplestinian hid th egunner. and when no one in the village would give up that person's name, the israeli soldiers closed the village off. even thought he palestinians were present at the family's funeral} israel has the right to defend themeselves, though they dont have the right to build settlements on palestinian land. but, i did go to israel to visit my missionary aunt {though shes a catholic,a nd ima protestant, we still have connections} we went to a druiz village and beduin {did i speel it right?} village, a found no israeli soldier in sight.that is becaus ethe druiz and beduin dont harbor terror, and respect their neighbors. for that, they are free to leave town and go anywere they want, at any time, any day. we spent the day there, and i met the locals, who are cool people. this shows that israel doesnt just oppress muslims for no reason as some people claim. i still hope that israel will stop making jewish settlements on palestinianlands, and i hopoe that the palestinians will no longer follow terrorists like yasser arafat's words.
Actually terrorist actions are not something that have been happening in that area for the entire history of the region. The main enemies were largely the surrounding Arab nations vs. Israel from 1945-approximately 1970 when things like the PLO began to be created, and they were created due to the fact that Palestine was still occupied, and the newly begun settlements following the failed wars by israel's arab neighbors . Unfortunately you don't really have any particular evidence in your answer, which also doesn't correspond to all evidence we have. In truth, misery breeds extremism, and misery is created through oppression. Also, your kibbutz analogy is horrific. The fact that you would say that a man could be ungrateful for having the "favor" of being allowed to work on his own lands...that is disgusting. He hid a murderer, which is wrong, but to claim that what Israel gave was charity...well...that is flagrantly incorrect.

Also, a new point to bring to the light: What about Israels land claim policies? The reason behind the original refugee problem is that the Israeli government decided, and still decides, that the claims given by Jewish settlers were more official than the ownership documents held by the Palestinians in the area.

i don't understand anybody siding up with either side.
this is not a soccermatch.

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

no. i am not. i dont even know why i worte pro-west democracy. i know that they are, but i didnt mean it like they deserve to exist anymore than palestine. i just am sying that israel is an official nation. palestine is not. and untill i see palestine as one, i will not reconize it as a country.

I thought that palestine is an official nation. If its not, its darn close to being official. Its an observer country in the UN.

naw. sorry. it never was either.
Um...yes...it is. Palestine has its own civil government, with a Prime Minister, a President, and a full government. It is an observer nation in the UN as well. Honestly, check facts before you speak.

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

no. i am not. i dont even know why i worte pro-west democracy. i know that they are, but i didnt mean it like they deserve to exist anymore than palestine. i just am sying that israel is an official nation. palestine is not. and untill i see palestine as one, i will not reconize it as a country.

I thought that palestine is an official nation. If its not, its darn close to being official. Its an observer country in the UN.

naw. sorry. it never was either.
Um...yes...it is. Palestine has its own civil government, with a Prime Minister, a President, and a full government. It is an observer nation in the UN as well. Honestly, check facts before you speak.
Thanks! You helped me look not so much like an idiot

Ok first of all, the P-I Conflict is definatly cause by the Muslims not the Palestinians or the Jews, lets take a trip down memory lane now shall we???

its After Christs death, and the Christians are all over the Middle East and most of the Roman Empire, Jews live in Judea aka Palestine.

Now lets foward to 622 A.D. the start of Mohammad's teachings of Islam, here was a poor 22 year old citizen of Mecca, All of a sudden Allah all powerful god of Muslims appears and says teach them... So lalalalala Mohammad teaches them, he gets pushed out of Mecca by rich people, so he decides to turn Islam into a cult like religion and say everybody we must make Islam an empire so he gets armies and then he starts taking up the Arabian Peninsula and Persian and soon Up into Asia Minor...

He gets to Judea and sees that these people might pose a threat to Islamic empire athority, and says "Mass Genocide and expullsion of the Jews", then take over africa and Spain.

So according to history and religious history, Jews were there first and islams attacked them.... Jews had been there since ancient egypt, they were the first religion, and by that right the first to live in the holy lands.

The there was the crusades and then soon the Muslim empire falls, due to self disintegration.

fast forward. WWI Britain takes over Middle East under mandate, and Jew start to move back to Israel/Palestine/Judea because there is finally some law and order due to British law.

1930s-WWII Because of Hitlers mass persecution of Jews a bigger, zionist movement occurs to Palestien.

1948- The UN decides that if the Jews dont get a homeland that they will be persecuted forever, so they give them land in Palestein, and the Muslims who live there share full access to the Med. Sea and everything else is shared. The jew are all happy go-lucky but the Palestinians and Islamics alike, go up in arms because they dont know the meaning of Peace on Earth, so the PALESTINIANS DECLARE WAR ON ISRAEL, so the rest of the Islamic nations around them do also...

History and Religion, both show that the Muslims were the ones who started this conflict and started many other conflicts in turn.

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

no. i am not. i dont even know why i worte pro-west democracy. i know that they are, but i didnt mean it like they deserve to exist anymore than palestine. i just am sying that israel is an official nation. palestine is not. and untill i see palestine as one, i will not reconize it as a country.

I thought that palestine is an official nation. If its not, its darn close to being official. Its an observer country in the UN.

naw. sorry. it never was either.
Um...yes...it is. Palestine has its own civil government, with a Prime Minister, a President, and a full government. It is an observer nation in the UN as well. Honestly, check facts before you speak.


Palestine has a pitiful, corrupt government, incapable of enforcing any rules.

The real power lies with Arafat, his Fatah, and groups like Hamas. If you asked the Palestinians who they support more, Hamas would topple the PLO in a landslide.

Israel made offers to give back 97-99% of the occupied lands to Arafat, but instead, Arafat said no, gave no counter proposal, and authorized more terrorist tactics against Israel.

The Arabs simply do not want Israel to exist, just because Israel occupied their land in the 50s didnt make them start hating them there. They've always hated the Jews, and they use the guise of "opression" to kill them.

Israel is more then willing to sit down and work things out, but when you have fools like Arafat being deified by the Palestinians and trusted to get them their own country, nothing good happens. If Hamas and friends would cease and let the peace process run, there would be a Palestinian state.

But of course, they hate Jews so much they cant stop fighting, even though it does more damage to their own cause.


Btw, Hamas kills substantial amounts of Arabs by their own irresponsible and ruthless hand, but still Arabs dont condemn that.

Akaviir - are you saying a pro-West democracy has more right to exist than any other state?

no. i am not. i dont even know why i worte pro-west democracy. i know that they are, but i didnt mean it like they deserve to exist anymore than palestine. i just am sying that israel is an official nation. palestine is not. and untill i see palestine as one, i will not reconize it as a country.

I thought that palestine is an official nation. If its not, its darn close to being official. Its an observer country in the UN.

naw. sorry. it never was either.
Um...yes...it is. Palestine has its own civil government, with a Prime Minister, a President, and a full government. It is an observer nation in the UN as well. Honestly, check facts before you speak.

they are not a real government. hey do not have laws or a military. only terrorists who hide behind them.

Of course Israel is willing to sit down and talk. Its two completely different cultures, with two complete different ethnic codes. We can try, and we can debate this issue, taking a side, but were never gonna fully understand until we can be inside the minds of top palestinian and israeli officials.

It's not a matter of who started this whole thing now, it's a matter of how to resolve it.

While Sharon's policies have caused backtracing on the "Roadmap to Peace," the Palestinians and Islamic leaders of the world aren't doing enough to denounce this Jihad being purported by groups like Hamas.

It seems like the conflict has gone from a whole "right to existance" debacle, degrading into little more than an overhyped turf war

the jews were moving into the area BEFORE WWII.
Balfour declaration 1918, the british promised the same land to Arabs and Jews because they both assisted Britain in the war against Turkey.

But even before this Jews were moving to the area. For instance after the pogroms in Russia.

Ok first of all, the P-I Conflict is definatly cause by the Muslims not the Palestinians or the Jews, lets take a trip down memory lane now shall we???

its After Christs death, and the Christians are all over the Middle East and most of the Roman Empire, Jews live in Judea aka Palestine.

Now lets foward to 622 A.D. the start of Mohammad's teachings of Islam, here was a poor 22 year old citizen of Mecca, All of a sudden Allah all powerful god of Muslims appears and says teach them... So lalalalala Mohammad teaches them, he gets pushed out of Mecca by rich people, so he decides to turn Islam into a cult like religion and say everybody we must make Islam an empire so he gets armies and then he starts taking up the Arabian Peninsula and Persian and soon Up into Asia Minor...

He gets to Judea and sees that these people might pose a threat to Islamic empire athority, and says "Mass Genocide and expullsion of the Jews", then take over africa and Spain.

So according to history and religious history, Jews were there first and islams attacked them.... Jews had been there since ancient egypt, they were the first religion, and by that right the first to live in the holy lands.

The there was the crusades and then soon the Muslim empire falls, due to self disintegration.

fast forward. WWI Britain takes over Middle East under mandate, and Jew start to move back to Israel/Palestine/Judea because there is finally some law and order due to British law.

1930s-WWII Because of Hitlers mass persecution of Jews a bigger, zionist movement occurs to Palestien.

1948- The UN decides that if the Jews dont get a homeland that they will be persecuted forever, so they give them land in Palestein, and the Muslims who live there share full access to the Med. Sea and everything else is shared. The jew are all happy go-lucky but the Palestinians and Islamics alike, go up in arms because they dont know the meaning of Peace on Earth, so the PALESTINIANS DECLARE WAR ON ISRAEL, so the rest of the Islamic nations around them do also...

History and Religion, both show that the Muslims were the ones who started this conflict and started many other conflicts in turn.
Well...if you ever read a history book then maybe you'd get something right, so lets take this piece by piece.

1) Directly after Christs death Christianity did not exist. In fact, it took nearly two centuries for Christianity to truly separate itself from Judaism, and until Pope Leo convinced Attila to not attack Rome that it gained a center.

2) Actually he tried to make Islam a reformed vision of Christianity. He was pushed out by Meccan merchants who feared his followers.

3) There was never mass genocide by the Muslim empire. In fact, up until the about halfway through Turkish dominance of the middle-east, specifically right after the losses in Hungary that began their descent, the Muslim empires were the most accomodating of all nations. True pilgrims were allowed to visit the Holy Lands without trouble, heck, the Shahs and other rulers invited them half the time.

4) Judaism is actually far from the oldest religion. Judaism is one of the older remaining religions, but Egyptian, Sumarian, ancient Chinese, ancient Indian, as well as Nomadic pagan religions are all considered older. In fact some parts of Judaism are borrowed from other religions such as Moses which is in fact a story taken while the Jews were in captivity in Babylon about Sargon the Great, and the Flood, which is found in older texts such as Gilgamesh.

5) Following World War One the British promise the Arabs that a new Arab state will be created in the Middle East encompassing the entire British and French mandate.

6) Zionist movement begins as a counter to pograms, way before Hitler.

7) England and France following World War One decide to solve their own problems with Judaism by pushing through a UN declaration creating Israel, which is created in much of the land promised to the Palestinians.

8) Surrounding Arab nations invade, intent on getting what was promised to them nearly 30 years before.

You got almost everything wrong, congratulations you don't know history at all.

I'd have to say that I tend to sympathize (yet not really support) more with the Palestinian people. They could live very good lives instead of being cramped into refugee camps if Israel could just maybe lighten its policies

If you ask me the only way to end the conflict is to re-appoint Mahmoud Abbas as Palestinian PM, remove Arafat's control over securtiy, and re-elect Ehmud Barak (sp?) as Israeli PM. Those two people, IMHO, are the best chance of peace in the region.

Oh btw I have a Jewish friend who can't stand Israel's Sharon either. He's thinking of forming a group known as JAZZ (Jews Against Zany Zoinists)

Intresting--but my support of the state of israel stems from my DISLIKE of TERRORISTS who attack a sovrign nation.

so even if yo dont like sharon, dont like ISRAEL, dont like jews, or dont like anybody, you probably dont like terrorism either, and that is why you should support ISrael.

Which side in this conflict do you support? Israel, returning to the land it hadn't owned for centuries, but is now fully entrenched in? The Palestinians, whom lived in the land, and largely still do, but never owned it?

Furthermore, whose policies are worse? The terroristic attacks by Palestine, or are those just the consequences of Israel's repressive policies, and its ignoring of international law (such as the many assassinations it has committed in other nations such as Brazil, Morocco, etc, without informing that nation's government of its plans).


Let the debate begin!

you mean the assassination of Nazi leaders no, that wasn't justified. The ****ing Nazis have a right to live (sarcasm).

GO ISRAEL!


Oh, and if you plan to write about either towel-heads, sand-lovers, or jew comments, then leave now, we don't need that.

Israel made offers to give back 97-99% of the occupied lands to Arafat, but instead, Arafat said no, gave no counter proposal, and authorized more terrorist tactics against Israel.

But of course, they hate Jews so much they cant stop fighting, even though it does more damage to their own cause.



There's a lot to object to in this thread, but I'll just respond to this for now.

During Clinton's Camp David summit, the Israeli side went with the knowledge that they could concede a great deal with no consequence and come away from the summit with their hands in the air, looking like the good guys. The reason for this was that they could say that they would give back a substantial portion of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, but do so in such a way that would be unacceptable to the Palestinians. Arafat had no choice but to reject the offer.

Why was it unacceptable? The relatively small percentage that the Israelis insisted on keeping made the idea of a sovereign Palestinian state unrealistic. It would have been entirely discontiguous and not at all viable politically, municipally, and financially. This is an simplification of the issue but I think it suffices for now for the purposes of our discussion. Had Arafat accepted the offer, the debate would be closed and he would have signed the entire Palestinian people to an impossible compromise. Even if there were and are no better prospects, it was unacceptable.

Yes, the Israelis came away with exactly what they wanted - a publicity victory. Arafat certainly knew that it was going to look very bad for him and very good for them. But, in the end, there was nothing to be done - the deal was simply unacceptable and he did what he had to do.

so even if yo dont like sharon, dont like ISRAEL, dont like jews, or dont like anybody, you probably dont like terrorism either, and that is why you should support ISrael.\


That is entirely unfair to the oppressed Palestinian people. The government of Israel commits some of the most atrocious acts in the modern world, and certainly THE most of any modern country. To see the issue that simply is just ignorant - maybe a quick fix for the unwilling conscience, but certainly no good as far as policy goes.

Arafat didn't agree to Barak's offer because the Israelis wouldn't agree to let several million Palestinians into Israel to live. It's this one issue that basically will prevent any peace accord from happening.

Most Palestinians live in refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Letting the refugees into Israel proper to live would be suicide for the Jewish state.

The reason why Arafat can't compromise on this issue is because the Arab nations during both the Israeli War of Independence and the Six Day War told the Palestinians that Israel would soon be defeated, and that they should move out of the region so that the Arab armies could sweep through; then, they could move back. Some people actually moved out, only to realize that there would be no victory for the Arab nations. However, most Palestinians were uprooted during the War of Independence and Six Day War--an occurrence that is unfortunate, but is the price that the Arab nations have to pay for losing the war. They should absorb the refugees, not the Israelis....

Here is just a thought.

How many Israeli's have internet?
How many Palestinians have internet?

How many Syrians have internet? A lot less than Israelis, I bet. And they have a country to themselves. I can bet that the quality of life for Palestinians wouldn't improve much if/when they get a state. They'll feel better about themselves, sure, sure they'll still be dirt poor due to a lack of a sound government running the country.

I guess the israeli cause looks somewhat suspicious because they want the whole pie. The palistinians don't want all of it, they just want some of it, and they want to be allowed equal say in the country. In fact, they'd be just as happy to share the country.

Besides, I see Sharon as a monster.

The ordinary israeli I have no problem with. For the most part, they're just trying to live their lives, and neither they nor the ordinary palistinian is to blame for the violence. It's the governments that act for them, or the terrorist factions that claim to represent them that have created the atmosphere of violence.

I'd side with the palistinians, though, as the underdog. I feel they have a valid complaint.

I guess the israeli cause looks somewhat suspicious because they want the whole pie. The palistinians don't want all of it, they just want some of it, and they want to be allowed equal say in the country. In fact, they'd be just as happy to share the country.

Besides, I see Sharon as a monster.

The ordinary israeli I have no problem with. For the most part, they're just trying to live their lives, and neither they nor the ordinary palistinian is to blame for the violence. It's the governments that act for them, or the terrorist factions that claim to represent them that have created the atmosphere of violence.

I'd side with the palistinians, though, as the underdog. I feel they have a valid complaint.Do you actually believe any of that first partagraph? If so, you should look into what the Palestinians themselves have said about Israels right to exist. As far as the "Palestinian lands are concerned, in my opinion, they lost thier right to any land within Israel after theybacked those who wanted to destroy Israel time and time again.

I think that the Palestinians lost the right to their own state when they rejected the proposal in 1947. They would have gotten a whole lot more land then than they would now.

The Palestinians haven't even started their side of the roadmap; while the Israelis have at least attempted their side of phase one, but are being slowed at best by terrorism.

Go the underdogs!!

I have choosen: Israel, but not the settlements. I don´t think it is possible for Israel to maintain them,except a few in the West Bank probably.
Just look to Gaza: 1,5 million palestinians and 7000 jewish settlers occupying almost 20% of the land. That can not be maintained in the long-run. Due to the huge population growth of the palestinians - the populations grows much faster than the population in Isreal - the population of the "occupied" terretories are going to be higher than the population within Israel in the borders of 1967. A seperation is needed and in the Israeli interests. Otherwise Israel could loose in the long-run its character as a jewish state. That would be the end of Israel.
I don´t want to see that. I want a strong Israel.
Therefore there is in the long-run no way around the creation of a state for the palestinians, which lives in peace with Israel.

Right and wrong can't be determined looking back the past few decades. The conflicts goes back thousands of years to Abraham - to the jealousy of Sarah, actually.

One day, the Dome of the Rock will be kicked out of Temple Mount and temple rebuilt. How the Israelis are going to do it, I have no idea. Either they make peace with the Arabs and impress them so greatly that the Arabs are going to relocate their holy place. Or they would develop nukes and destroy the Arab world, they smash the Dome and rebuild their temple.

I guess the israeli cause looks somewhat suspicious because they want the whole pie. The palistinians don't want all of it, they just want some of it, and they want to be allowed equal say in the country. In fact, they'd be just as happy to share the country.

Besides, I see Sharon as a monster.

The ordinary israeli I have no problem with. For the most part, they're just trying to live their lives, and neither they nor the ordinary palistinian is to blame for the violence. It's the governments that act for them, or the terrorist factions that claim to represent them that have created the atmosphere of violence.

I'd side with the palistinians, though, as the underdog. I feel they have a valid complaint.
the first paragraph makes no sense. when sharon was going to give all alot of palestine back to terrorist yasser arafat, but he wouldnt accept, he wanted everything. thge arabs believe that the jews have no right to exist, and they dont believe that america has the right to exis. but of course, 99 % of americans refuse to understand that.

And what backup claim do you have to call SHaron a monster? he is a good leader trying to protect his people from the palestinian terrorist. of course few people will ever understand. the arabs started this war. they attacked israel, countless times, before israel ever declared war on any pof them. read my earlier post on why sharon closes off settlements.

and one mroe thing, which you fail to understand, is taht the palestinians are not the underdogs. israel is. everyone wants israel destroyed; the arabs, the europeans, and the UN. in its 50 year existence, israel has faced more wars than america has in it's 200+ year history. israel was attacked by the syrians, lebonese, turks, jordanians, egytions, and many others. israel only has a treaty with egypt, jordan, and turkey. they still have terrorists from many nations waiting to kill their civilians, and there still is a chance that the arabs {not in general, i mean the nations} wll drop bombs on israel. another thing is that israel only has six million people. they are not soem superpower that most people put them as.

Right and wrong can't be determined looking back the past few decades. The conflicts goes back thousands of years to Abraham - to the jealousy of Sarah, actually.

One day, the Dome of the Rock will be kicked out of Temple Mount and temple rebuilt. How the Israelis are going to do it, I have no idea. Either they make peace with the Arabs and impress them so greatly that the Arabs are going to relocate their holy place. Or they would develop nukes and destroy the Arab world, they smash the Dome and rebuild their temple.

???? what the hell? you obviously know nothing about the conflict. what does today have to do with ancient times anyway? and how teh hell was israel going to develop nukes to destoy the arabs? the arabs are the ones with the stolen weapons. israel only has one or two to defend themeselves. and besides, if russia is allowed to hold an endless supply of weapons, why ant the israelies defend themeselves. and another thing, your argument doesnt make any sense.

@Akaviir,


well it is assumed that Israel is possesing around 400 nuclear missiles.
That is the number of nukes France and the UK possess together (200 each). That is a substantial nuclear deterrent, especially given the fact that the enemy doesn´t posses nukes until now.

@Akaviir,


well it is assumed that Israel is possesing around 400 nuclear missiles.
That is the number of nukes France and the UK possess together (200 each). That is a substantial nuclear deterrent, especially given the fact that the enemy doesn´t posses nukes until now.

evidence... i bet none. believe me,you are incorrect.

Sharon is a monster. Sabra and Shatila and the Six Day War. He has been personally responsible for carnage and murder in both cases. PERSONALLY responsible.

If you want the links, I'll go find them, but I really don't see how something so well documented needs reiteration. He does NOT represent the Israeli state. He SHOULD NOT represent the Israeli state. As long as he is in office, he holds back the peace process. He offers something with one hand, to give the appearance of being for peace, while he allows the soldiers to do things to provoke a violent reaction from the Palestinians, often under specific orders, sometimes simply overlooking their actions.

You may be right though. The damage may already have been done. There may be no peace possible between them anymore, or at least coexistence.

There were jews living in Palestine before the inception of the Israeli state. They lived there with the approval and acceptance of the people already there. It was only when they were given the country and began to "transfer" the Palestinians to Jordan or to the little slice of land on the west bank that the relationship turned sour.

Here is just a thought.

How many Israeli's have internet?
How many Palestinians have internet?
Israelis with internet access would probably be about the same proportion as any other western state, so a very high one, Palestinians...very very few.

@Akaviir,


well it is assumed that Israel is possesing around 400 nuclear missiles.
That is the number of nukes France and the UK possess together (200 each). That is a substantial nuclear deterrent, especially given the fact that the enemy doesn´t posses nukes until now.
Assumed being the key word here. If you check it out well, there is no other source for this claim than vague estimations based on information made public by the infamous Mordechai Vanunu (200 nukes), doubled because of the time that passed (20 years), during which Israel, supposedly, could produce more. The truth is that no one really knows whether Israel has nukes and how many. :evil:

@Womblingdon,

the truth is - and that we all know due to documents presented by the infamous traitor Vanunu - that Israel had possesed nuclear weapons and still is possessing them. There are actually more information about the Israeli nuclear program - which started already in the 1960s - than the statements of Vanunu. It is understable that Israel wants to keep and maintain a nuclear deterrent. I understand that completly and I think Israel has every right to do so.

Regarding the numbers: you are right: nobody knows for shure - that´s why I wrote: "assumed".
The Israeli government after all follows a policy of nuclear ambigiouity.
Therefore it is not commenting on its nuclear program.
However: due to all the information which are available we can without reasonable doubt say that Israel posseses nukes, but the numbers can only be roughly estimated.

@Womblingdon,

the truth is - and that we all know due to documents presented by the infamous traitor Vanunu - that Israel had possesed nuclear weapons and still is possessing them. There are actually more information about the Israeli nuclear program - which started already in the 1960s - than the statements of Vanunu. It is understable that Israel wants to keep and maintain a nuclear deterrent. I understand that completly and I think Israel has every right to do so.

Regarding the numbers: you are right: nobody knows for shure - that´s why I wrote: "assumed".
The Israeli government after all follows a policy of nuclear ambigiouity.
Therefore it is not commenting on its nuclear program.
However: due to all the information which are available we can without reasonable doubt say that Israel posseses nukes, but the numbers can only be roughly estimated.
What other information sources are there for the claim that Israel possesses nuclear weapons? And I mean those who do not rely on Vanunu?

Well: I can not give you something what is 100% prove.
But in context of this Vanunu release story I´ve watched an interesting report on Isreals alleged nuclear program.
Aside Vanunu other sources were named and people said what they claim to know. For example that at a time when Israel still allowed inspections it was hiding the underground facilities and only allowed inspections of the overground facilities. There is plenty of evidence that Israel wants to hide something - therefore the rejection of inspections as well as the non-proliferation treaty (which only allows the five winners of WW II to posses nukes - the five veto powers at the UN - the only justification by the way that only those countries have a veto power or still have a veto power). There are two other countries which refused to sign that treaty - Pakistan and India. And those two also developed nukes.

As a matter of fact North Korea also refused to sign until 1994. Today it is threatening its withdrawl from the treaty.
Well: why should a country refuse to sign if it doesn´t have nukes or wants to develop them????

Well: I can not give you something what is 100% prove.
But in context of this Vanunu release story I´ve watched an interesting report on Isreals alleged nuclear program.
Aside Vanunu other sources were named and people said what they claim to know. For example that at a time when Israel still allowed inspections it was hiding the underground facilities and only allowed inspections of the overground facilities. There is plenty of evidence that Israel wants to hide something - therefore the rejection of inspections as well as the non-proliferation treaty (which only allows the five winners of WW II to posses nukes - the five veto powers at the UN - the only justification by the way that only those countries have a veto power or still have a veto power). There are two other countries which refused to sign that treaty - Pakistan and India. And those two also developed nukes.

As a matter of fact North Korea also refused to sign until 1994. Today it is threatening its withdrawl from the treaty.
Well: why should a country refuse to sign if it doesn´t have nukes or wants to develop them????
A better question is- why would a country that has nuke deny that they have them? Think about it: no one can really force a country with nukes to scrap them. India doesn't scrap theirs, Pakistan doesn't scrap theirs. First thing these two (and North Korea as well) did once they had operational nukes was proudly demonstrating them to the world. It makes a lot of sense: for nukes to serve as a deterrent, the enemy must know they are there- and if you have more nukes than two major nuclear powers combined- all the more reasons to make it as public as possible.

In the case of Israel nuclear ambigiuity makes sense.
Their action to publicy announce to be a nuclear power would put a lot of pressure on countries to condem Israel for that.
The US for example imposed sanctions on India and Pakistan for several years because of their nukes.
Well: they wouldn´t do that against Israel. But they wouldn´t be pleased to justify publicly why they react differently here than towards other countries.
It would also be difficult for moderate islamic countries to continue their cooperation with Israel.
Leaving it open is actually a very reasonable policy by Israel, althought they certainly have nukes.

ok, not speaking from a bias viewpoint not being Arab or Israeli, I believe Israel for the most part is in the wrong in this situation.

A state that is created out of religious reasons while dismissing populations in the region who too who have lived there is a State that is guilty of overt prejudice. One of the reasons why Israel had great support from countries when being created is because nations like the US and the UK did not want scores of Jewish immigrants coming to their countries as well as sympathy after world war II.

Since then Israel is the biggest party who can make the biggest difference. The reason they have support from America is because of the signifcant Jewish population hence powerful lobby. It is why America vetoes the countless resolutions against Israel. Israel is indeed a nation that breaches many human rights. The likkud party insist on expanding settlements and in the process Arabs are forced out their homes due to ethnically not fitting the prototype of the "chosen people." Israel also has nulclear weapons in the region, weapons of mass destruction one might say that can be used against regional populations.

I disagree with Palestinian terrorists and I disagree with zionist terrorists. But it is Israel's actions which have deeply resulted in this vicious circle. I'm not anti-semitic I hate the way one is accused of anti-semtism due to their critisism of Israel's actions. I believe zionism is not religiously or racially correct it is a prejudice ideology which only benefits one party.

END THE ILLEGAL OCCUPATION
FREE PALESTINE

ok, not speaking from a bias viewpoint not being Arab or Israeli, I believe Israel for the most part is in the wrong in this situation.

A state that is created out of religious reasons while dismissing populations in the region who too who have lived there is a State that is guilty of overt prejudice. One of the reasons why Israel had great support from countries when being created is because nations like the US and the UK did not want scores of Jewish immigrants coming to their countries as well as sympathy after world war II.

Since then Israel is the biggest party who can make the biggest difference. The reason they have support from America is because of the signifcant Jewish population hence powerful lobby. It is why America vetoes the countless resolutions against Israel. Israel is indeed a nation that breaches many human rights. The likkud party insist on expanding settlements and in the process Arabs are forced out their homes due to ethnically not fitting the prototype of the "chosen people." Israel also has nulclear weapons in the region, weapons of mass destruction one might say that can be used against regional populations.

I disagree with Palestinian terrorists and I disagree with zionist terrorists. But it is Israel's actions which have deeply resulted in this vicious circle. I'm not anti-semitic I hate the way one is accused of anti-semtism due to their critisism of Israel's actions. I believe zionism is not religiously or racially correct it is a prejudice ideology which only benefits one party.

END THE ILLEGAL OCCUPATION
FREE PALESTINE

ok, not speaking from a bias viewpoint not being Arab or Israeli, I believe Israel for the most part is in the wrong in this situation.

A state that is created out of religious reasons while dismissing populations in the region who too who have lived there is a State that is guilty of overt prejudice. One of the reasons why Israel had great support from countries when being created is because nations like the US and the UK did not want scores of Jewish immigrants coming to their countries as well as sympathy after world war II.

Since then Israel is the biggest party who can make the biggest difference. The reason they have support from America is because of the signifcant Jewish population hence powerful lobby. It is why America vetoes the countless resolutions against Israel. Israel is indeed a nation that breaches many human rights. The likkud party insist on expanding settlements and in the process Arabs are forced out their homes due to ethnically not fitting the prototype of the "chosen people." Israel also has nulclear weapons in the region, weapons of mass destruction one might say that can be used against regional populations.

I disagree with Palestinian terrorists and I disagree with zionist terrorists. But it is Israel's actions which have deeply resulted in this vicious circle. I'm not anti-semitic I hate the way one is accused of anti-semtism due to their critisism of Israel's actions. I believe zionism is not religiously or racially correct it is a prejudice ideology which only benefits one party.

END THE ILLEGAL OCCUPATION
FREE PALESTINE
That was one of the biggest collections of cliches that I've ever heard. Can't even be bothered to debunk it point by point, I've done that way too many times on this board.

Israel, for the simple reason that I support the more organised side, the side you can make deals with. For example, if Bush asked Sharon to hold off on attacks on Palestinians fr 2 days, Sharon would probably agree if Bush made it worth his while (eg. he didn't withdraw American support). But let's say Bush or whoever wants to get the Palestinains to hold off attacks fr 2 days. Who does he call? Arafat can't control his own people, and there's no leader of all the terrorists. Even if 99% of the terrorists agree, Joe Palestinian-Terrorist and his friends could stilll keep bombing Israel.

I support the side you can negotiate with, and you can't negotiate with terrorists.

Israel, for the simple reason that I support the more organised side, the side you can make deals with. For example, if Bush asked Sharon to hold off on attacks on Palestinians fr 2 days, Sharon would probably agree if Bush made it worth his while (eg. he didn't withdraw American support). But let's say Bush or whoever wants to get the Palestinains to hold off attacks fr 2 days. Who does he call? Arafat can't control his own people, and there's no leader of all the terrorists. Even if 99% of the terrorists agree, Joe Palestinian-Terrorist and his friends could stilll keep bombing Israel.

I support the side you can negotiate with, and you can't negotiate with terrorists.
No, if America was to switch which side it supported, you'd be surprised to see how suddenly those terrorists became controlled.

ok, not speaking from a bias viewpoint not being Arab or Israeli, I believe Israel for the most part is in the wrong in this situation.

A state that is created out of religious reasons while dismissing populations in the region who too who have lived there is a State that is guilty of overt prejudice. One of the reasons why Israel had great support from countries when being created is because nations like the US and the UK did not want scores of Jewish immigrants coming to their countries as well as sympathy after world war II.

Since then Israel is the biggest party who can make the biggest difference. The reason they have support from America is because of the signifcant Jewish population hence powerful lobby. It is why America vetoes the countless resolutions against Israel. Israel is indeed a nation that breaches many human rights. The likkud party insist on expanding settlements and in the process Arabs are forced out their homes due to ethnically not fitting the prototype of the "chosen people." Israel also has nulclear weapons in the region, weapons of mass destruction one might say that can be used against regional populations.

I disagree with Palestinian terrorists and I disagree with zionist terrorists. But it is Israel's actions which have deeply resulted in this vicious circle. I'm not anti-semitic I hate the way one is accused of anti-semtism due to their critisism of Israel's actions. I believe zionism is not religiously or racially correct it is a prejudice ideology which only benefits one party.

END THE ILLEGAL OCCUPATION
FREE PALESTINE

Well said!

ok, not speaking from a bias viewpoint not being Arab or Israeli, I believe Israel for the most part is in the wrong in this situation.

A state that is created out of religious reasons while dismissing populations in the region who too who have lived there is a State that is guilty of overt prejudice. One of the reasons why Israel had great support from countries when being created is because nations like the US and the UK did not want scores of Jewish immigrants coming to their countries as well as sympathy after world war II.

Since then Israel is the biggest party who can make the biggest difference. The reason they have support from America is because of the signifcant Jewish population hence powerful lobby. It is why America vetoes the countless resolutions against Israel. Israel is indeed a nation that breaches many human rights. The likkud party insist on expanding settlements and in the process Arabs are forced out their homes due to ethnically not fitting the prototype of the "chosen people." Israel also has nulclear weapons in the region, weapons of mass destruction one might say that can be used against regional populations.

I disagree with Palestinian terrorists and I disagree with zionist terrorists. But it is Israel's actions which have deeply resulted in this vicious circle. I'm not anti-semitic I hate the way one is accused of anti-semtism due to their critisism of Israel's actions. I believe zionism is not religiously or racially correct it is a prejudice ideology which only benefits one party.

END THE ILLEGAL OCCUPATION
FREE PALESTINE

Hey, nice work, that pretty much sums it up. Thank you!

And you, wommblyman - nice counter :roll:

so even if yo dont like sharon, dont like ISRAEL, dont like jews, or dont like anybody, you probably dont like terrorism either, and that is why you should support ISrael.\


That is entirely unfair to the oppressed Palestinian people. The government of Israel commits some of the most atrocious acts in the modern world, and certainly THE most of any modern country. To see the issue that simply is just ignorant - maybe a quick fix for the unwilling conscience, but certainly no good as far as policy goes.

could you provide some statistics to support that?

the MOST atrocities of any modern country?

Hmm,
Germany-12 million.
Rawanda- (alot)
russia/kosovo?

think before you type.
and btw It isnt a policy stance, Its an ideological one.

I think it's fair to say that while Israel is not guilty of the most atrocious acts in the modern world, they are by no means innocent.

Also, I think there's something to the idea that the US and the UK didn't want all of the jewish refugees to come to their shores. Not that it was right. I'm not saying the stance was right. There was an episode during WWII in which a ship full of jewish children was turned away from assylum in the US. This was on the advice of FDR's sister. The children ultimately died.

I liked the comment about the US switching sides, too. It will never happen, due to the israeli nukes, but I think the point is valid. If we became supportive of the palestinian side, then yes, they'd suddenly become easier to negotiate with.

Part of the problem too, is that the US has talks about peace with Israel without inviting a delegation from Palestine. It happens much more often than instances in which we talk with the Palestinians without having Israelis present.

I support Palestine. I sent an e-mail to Hamas, telling them that while I do not support directly targeting civilians, that I believe that Palestinian freedom can only be won through freedom fighters (I think Hamas is a little radical in the religious area, but they are fighting the common enemy).

I don't deny that millions of Jews died in the Holocaust. But that doesn't justify killing thousands of Palestinians today, and over the past decades.

Before 1948, The Jews were the only race not to have a homeland. As a result of this they were often persecuted in foreign lands such as; the pogroms of eastern Russia, ghettos in Venice as early as the 12th century, massacres of jews in Baghdad, massacres of Jews in what used to be Palastine, and finally the holocaust. It was only after this that the UN realised the right of the jews to a homeland.

MYTH:It was the palastinians land, which Israel stole.
FACT: The land which formed 1948 Israel HAD BEEN BOUGHT by Jewish Zionists, perfectly legitimately. the UN simply allowed the newly bought land to be nationalised. After wars started by the arab states such as egypt and Jordan, Israel has moved to its current day borders.

I would like to point out that Israel have not comitted any attrocities. It is not profitable for Israel to keep up the occupation, but due to the impotency and corruption of the PA(Even Syria have witheld funds from them) in stopping terrorists it is necessary. Statistics condeming Israel are Usually proved false eg::

After the Jenin incident, the first statistics claimed Israel had killed over 500 people. The UN reporty then established that 40 had been killed, 33 of whom were terrorists, who were fully fledged members of hamas. This is an image mirrored everywhere.

I support Israel. We shall not question the right of existence for the state of Israel in secure borders. If that is enshured I would however support the foundation of a palestinian state on the West bank and Gaza living side by side and peacefully with Israel.
However the current political situation on the palestinian side seems to make that impossible for the foreseable future. Unfortunately!!!

I don't support either sides tactics. I don't think there is much of a difference between a young man using himself as a human bomb to kill people or a missile being launched into a residential area to kill people. They're both the same in this regard.

However, I do find myself feeling more sympathetic towards Palestine then Israel. I usually do have a soft spot for the under-dog.

I used to support isreal since they are not the ones using the suicide bombers but then i watch a documentary on the Discovery civalazations channel and I got a chnace to take a glimps of both views. The palistinains want The right to vote and do not want the wall being built because it cuts off sities and villages and cages them in there cuasing the town or city's econamy to just crumble. This give palistinains little chance at a successful life and limits there choices to either live a pitiful existence or kill themselves and become a hero to their people. The Isrealies want to feel safe, stay a "jewish state" and keep their sovernty from palistine. But the wall they biuld is robbing palistinian more land and puting them in cages and intern the palistinains kill isrealies so its an endless cycle or violence and opression. Both are wrong and both are right. Until they can come to some form of agreement niether can live in peace.

I am for both of them to have a land to call their own.

I am against their violent tactics against each other.

I think Israel has the most power to stop the violence though, but not by assasinating anyone they want and demolishing Palestinians towns and taking so many of the Palestinians to prison for throwing rocks at their tanks or just being a teenage male.

Palestinians are not right for performing terrorist actions in the least but their actions are out of desperation. They don't see what else they can do the try to scare the Israelis into leaving them alone and ending their occupation and expansion into their territories. They don't have tanks or planes to fight a military battle so they are goign about it politically and using tactics not unlike Dubyas... shock and awe and the politics of fear.

I think Israel should pull out of Palestine completely and dismantle the Jewish settlements in Palestine. They should definitely keep a very strong border to keep Palestinians out of Israel and make a plan with allies in trying to help build Palestine into a working country that can support itself.

The occupation does nothing to help Palestine but it sure does help israel expand into Palestinian land.

I am not against Israel, I am just against the oppression and occupation of the Palestinians.

I'm not too sure where this "powerful Jewish lobby" is coming from. It's the Christian lobby who tells the US to support Israel. Most Jews - especially the deeply religious Jews - do not support the current state of Israel because it was taken by military might, rather than by God.

God is the one who cast us into exile and it is only God who can return us. The Talmud states that if Israel is taken back by military might, ceaseless war will be the result.

The majority of Jews are not Zionists and there were plenty of Jews living in Palestine peacefully alongside their Muslim brothers until the Christians stepped in and started screwing up the whole thing.

By all means despise Zionism and the torment of the Palestinians, but be sure you know who to blaim. We don't have the money or the resources to force the US to do anything. In the whole world there are maybe only 13 million Jews. Compared to the 2 billion Christians, we don't really have much of a voice. In the United States, out of a population of 300+ million, there are only 5.8 million Jews. There are more Pagans in the US than there are Jews!

As for money, well, if you look at Forbes list of the top ten wealthiest people in the world for 2004, you find Karl Albrecht at #3 is the only Jew on the list and he's German, not American.

To find the next wealthiest Jew, you have to look down the list to #14, Theo Albrecht, Karl's brother. Combined, they're worth less than Bill Gates. It's a lot of money in the family, but I'm a Jew and I've never received a dime from them. Although they may be slated for the next Hanukah song ... have to get back to you on that one.

Sorry, but in this country - as we've been in just about every country we've ever lived in and got kicked out of - we are the jesters, the clowns, the entertainers. Not a whole lot of power, although I'm flattered that people out there think so.

I tell you were this "powerful jewish lobby" comes from. It comes out of the mind of societies with a long history of anti-semitism. I mean: Jews were blamed for everything throughout history: from killing Jesus to causing the plague (which really killed uncounted people: estimates go to the tens of millions), poisoning water, killing christian children, supporting the reformation (and by doing so breaking the power of the catholic church), supporting counter-reformation (fighting against protestants), causing the French revolution, opposing the french revolution, supporting liberalism, supporting the ruling classes, support communism (so called jewish bolshevists), supporting capitalism, e.g..

Well: That´s the history of accusation of untill the middle of the 20 th century and that was the atmosphere when the Nazi party rised in Germany. And that was the atmosphere in many countries where significant parts of the population supported the anti-jewish policy of the Nazis after they were invaded. That´s the historic truth.

It would be unrealistic to expect that a prejudice which existed for more than thousand years would disappear within 50 years.

Let me begin by saying that I am a secular Canadian Jew. I do not claim that this makes my arguments any more valid, but this will give you an idea of how to frame them.

I do not consider the current state of affairs in the Middle East by any means to be acceptable. A militarized, quasi-democratic state is claiming to speak for the global Jewish community, while at the same time ignoring the fact that many of their actions go contrary to centuries of Jewish philosophy. Their leader, a war criminal, is largely viewed as responsible for starting the current al-Aqsa intifada. On the other side, we have a people, suffering under a brutal, thirty-seven year occupation (which I wholeheartedly condemn), who have decided that the only way to achieve peace is to blow themselves and large amounts of innocent civilians up, which in turn causes the IDF to respond in kind tit-for-tat, and the cycle continues.

Neither side is blameless in this conflict. As long as old war-horses such as Sharon and Arafat continue to dictate policy, there can never be peace.

I am not a Zionist, nor am I an anti-Zionist. I am certainly not a self-hating Jew. On the contrary, I believe that it is the responsibility of the Jewish community to condemn violent acts of terror on either side, and to work towards a lasting peace.

There, I've said my bit.

"As for money, well, if you look at Forbes list of the top ten wealthiest people in the world for 2004, you find Karl Albrecht at #3 is the only Jew on the list and he's German, not American."
I didn´t now that he was jewish. Who cares.
Aldi group is a good super market chain.
I was aware that they are the richest germans but I didn´t know that the were really on place 3 in the world. I thought that there would be only Americans under the top ten.

Since it would appear I can't edit my post, I would just like to recommend the book Wrestling With Zion: Progressive Jewish-American Views on the Israel-Palestinian Conflict as excellent reading.

There, I've said my bit.

Good bit!
:)

I would support Isreal killing all the Palestinians so they can live in peace. And I hope that don't listen to what the UN is telling them and keep building their wall.

Good bit!
:)

Thanks :). It would be nice to hear other well-thought out arguments, instead of the usual flame-war threads like these tend to descend into.

Forcing people to favour a side on this complicated issue is a stupid idea.

I was aware that they are the richest germans but I didn´t know that the were really on place 3 in the world. I thought that there would be only Americans under the top ten.

Oh you betcha!

Forbes List (http://www.forbes.com/lists/results.jhtml?passListId=10&passYear=2004&passListType=Person&searchParameter1=unset&searchParameter2=unset&resultsHowMany=25&resultsSortProperties=%2Bnumberfield1%2C%2Bstringfield2&resultsSortCategoryName=Rank&fromColumnClick=&bktDisplayField=&bktDisplayFieldLength=&category1=category&category2=category&passKeyword=&resultsStart=1)

8 of the top 10 are Americans, but we haven't got all of them yet.

Before 1948, The Jews were the only race not to have a homeland. As a result of this they were often persecuted in foreign lands such as; the pogroms of eastern Russia, ghettos in Venice as early as the 12th century, massacres of jews in Baghdad, massacres of Jews in what used to be Palastine, and finally the holocaust. It was only after this that the UN realised the right of the jews to a homeland.

MYTH:It was the palastinians land, which Israel stole.
FACT: The land which formed 1948 Israel HAD BEEN BOUGHT by Jewish Zionists, perfectly legitimately. the UN simply allowed the newly bought land to be nationalised. After wars started by the arab states such as egypt and Jordan, Israel has moved to its current day borders.

MYTH: It was bought legally.
FACT:In 1948, at the moment that Israel declared itself a state, it legally owned a little more than 6 percent of the land of Palestine...After 1940, when the mandatory authority restricted Jewish land ownership to specific zones inside Palestine, there continued to be illegal buying (and selling) within the 65 percent of the total area restricted to Arabs.

Thus when the partition plan was announced in 1947 it included land held illegally by Jews, which was incorporated as a fait accompli inside the borders of the Jewish state. And after Israel announced its statehood, an impressive series of laws legally assimilated huge tracts of Arab land (whose proprietors had become refugees, and were pronounced ‘absentee landlords’ in order to expropriate their lands and prevent their return under any circumstances.

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/history/origin.html

i don't understand why they are still continuing this violence in this day and age, i hope that when the new generation of leaders come through they will stop the fighting

however leaders with strong policies on the conflict will be lead to power then continue the rampage of humanitarian crisis
I would make the land a neutral zone of no countries and use it for the international community, however i would hardly expect that desicion to be welcomed

I would support Isreal killing all the Palestinians so they can live in peace. And I hope that don't listen to what the UN is telling them and keep building their wall.

Unfortunately killing never leads to peace.....it just causes violent reprisals and starts an ongoing cycle of hatred. Unless, of course, you actually succeed in totally exterminating a population. Which, to be fair, is unlikely.

Consider how you would feel if a new country was suddenly spawned inside your own nation in which you live; if it kept on expanding its borders even after the UN told it to stop; and the most powerful country in the world decided to support it against you.

I don't condone the violent actions of either side...the ideal solution would surely be to give the leaders of both countries a mild beating, then lock them in a room together and force them to work out a compromise, administering further beatings every time they failed. That'd work nicely.

i don't understand why they are still continuing this violence in this day and age, i hope that when the new generation of leaders come through they will stop the fighting

however leaders with strong policies on the conflict will be lead to power then continue the rampage of humanitarian crisis
I would make the land a neutral zone of no countries and use it for the international community, however i would hardly expect that desicion to be welcomed

Your solution is intriguing. The obvious question that comes to mind is: where do the people living in what was formerly Israel and the Occupied Territories go? You can't just dictate a neutral zone and then declare that all nation-states or self-determining peoples would then have to buzz off... could you please explain a bit?

Thanks :). It would be nice to hear other well-thought out arguments, instead of the usual flame-war threads like these tend to descend into.

Forcing people to favour a side on this complicated issue is a stupid idea.

I've heard some great debate on all sides of the coin - from the fanatic to the radical - and it does seem like most everyone has a strong opinion about the whole Israel/Palestine thing.

I have noticed a lot of constants, though.

1] If Ariel Sharon does something, all Israelites are blamed for it. As if average Joe Jew has any say in what Sharon does any more than average Joe American has any say in what Bush does. Sharon, like Bush, is a temporarily elected leader ... not an emperor for life.

2] The same people who scream that a 30 year old white man today has no culpability for African slavery also scream that I - a 32 year old Jew - should be blamed for what the Rothschilds did in the early 1700s.

3] Jews in the US (and other parts of the Diaspora) are blamed for what Sharon does as though we're allowed to vote in Israeli elections.

I generally find it amusing, but then, I don't deny that we caused the Black Plague with our magic. ;)

Unfortunately killing never leads to peace.....it just causes violent reprisals and starts an ongoing cycle of hatred. Unless, of course, you actually succeed in totally exterminating a population. Which, to be fair, is unlikely.

Consider how you would feel if a new country was suddenly spawned inside your own nation in which you live; if it kept on expanding its borders even after the UN told it to stop; and the most powerful country in the world decided to support it against you.

I don't condone the violent actions of either side...the ideal solution would surely be to give the leaders of both countries a mild beating, then lock them in a room together and force them to work out a compromise, administering further beatings every time they failed. That'd work nicely.

Extermination isn't that hard if you use all mean at your disposal. And America will always support Isreal no matter what the UN says.

I've heard some great debate on all sides of the coin - from the fanatic to the radical - and it does seem like most everyone has a strong opinion about the whole Israel/Palestine thing.

I have noticed a lot of constants, though.

1] If Ariel Sharon does something, all Israelites are blamed for it. As if average Joe Jew has any say in what Sharon does any more than average Joe American has any say in what Bush does. Sharon, like Bush, is a temporarily elected leader ... not an emperor for life.

2] The same people who scream that a 30 year old white man today has no culpability for African slavery also scream that I - a 32 year old Jew - should be blamed for what the Rothschilds did in the early 1700s.

3] Jews in the US (and other parts of the Diaspora) are blamed for what Sharon does as though we're allowed to vote in Israeli elections.

I generally find it amusing, but then, I don't deny that we caused the Black Plague with our magic. ;)

Well said. I also found a website that claimed we caused the Fall of the Roman Empire, the French Revolution, Anarchism, Communism, Atheism, etc. :rolleyes:

I support Israel, of course....

Oh you betcha!
8 of the top 10 are Americans, but we haven't got all of them yet.

Well, I´m not surprised that Karl has more much more than his broder Theo. After all: Aldi Süd (south) is much better than Aldi Nord (north). The have a better variety and a better choice of products. Fortunately I`m living in the Aldi Süd -region.
Well: there are other super markets as well: like Penny or Tengelmann, or Lidl. Aldi, Lidl and Penny markt are all pretty cheap. So they are good. "Geiz is geil" - to be a scrooge is cool.

Enod, one set of humans should not get to survive over another, and certainly would not end violence. If anything there should be a virus constructed that is terminal to ALL humans. Then finally the earth can be peaceful again.

An observation:
How bad is life for Palestinians living in the occupied territories when blowing yourself up is the BETTER alternative?

:headbang:
It is futile to attempt any ceasation of hostilities between Isreal and Palestine. They loathe one another over the land disputes that date to Old Testament times. They also despise one another of the simple terms of their religions. They have both taken eye-for-eye. They are now blind. They refuse to see any solution that is presented using the last evil of the other as an excuse to take another of the other's eyes.

Solution:
:mp5:
Give each side one nuke, sit back wath fireworks. (of coures we need to insure that Isreal does not use any of its own nuklear weapons.)

:headbang:
It is futile to attempt any ceasation of hostilities between Isreal and Palestine. They loathe one another over the land disputes that date to Old Testament times. They also despise one another of the simple terms of their religions. They have both taken eye-for-eye. They are now blind. They refuse to see any solution that is presented using the last evil of the other as an excuse to take another of the other's eyes.

Solution:
:mp5:
Give each side one nuke, sit back wath fireworks. (of coures we need to insure that Isreal does not use any of its own nuklear weapons.)

Dating back to Biblical times? Hmmm. Except for the people who build settlements because they think it's their god-given right to, the majority of Israelis are secular, and therefore only concerned with the situation as it presents itself now. It is in the best interest of Israel to ultimately seek peace.

On the flipside, it is only recently that religious fundamentalism has seeped into the Palestinian Nationalist movement. Arafat is a military practitioner of realpolitik, not a Taliban mullah. Given the choice between war/occupation and peace/two-nation solution, which one is more likely to be acceptable to the majority of Palestinians?

Did anybody else notice that the Facts of Israel site that was linked earlier in the thread does not mention the assassination of Yitzak Rabin because it was done by a fanatical Jew? You can bet if the killer was muslim it would have been the main thing on the site....

Did anybody else notice that the Facts of Israel site that was linked earlier in the thread does not mention the assassination of Yitzak Rabin because it was done by a fanatical Jew? You can bet if the killer was muslim it would have been the main thing on the site....

Indeed, some of my Zionist friends seem to think that the killer was indeed Palestinian. Some of my other Zionist friends scoffed at this, clearly indicating that uninformed opinions exist on all sides.

Did anybody else notice that the Facts of Israel site that was linked earlier in the thread does not mention the assassination of Yitzak Rabin because it was done by a fanatical Jew? You can bet if the killer was muslim it would have been the main thing on the site....Yes and I'm sure the Palestinians are very unbiased and correct themselves when it comes to bringing out news items and facts. Lol. Give me a break.

Yes and I'm sure the Palestinians are very unbiased and correct themselves when it comes to bringing out news items and facts. Lol. Give me a break.

Your break is given. This is why I do not depend on Israeli or Palestinian coverage of the conflict. (No shit sherlock!) I use google news to get news from all over the world, and examine both sides of an issue. Iw as merely pointing out an obvious hole in a source that should be disregarded. So many people act like "if your not for Israel you are for terrorists" Is just disgusting. So, I believe it is you who should give ME a break.


EDIT: Wait a minute, WHAT palestinian coverage?

An observation:
How bad is life for Palestinians living in the occupied territories when blowing yourself up is the BETTER alternative?


Exactly!

Your break is given. This is why I do not depend on Israeli or Palestinian coverage of the conflict. (No shit sherlock!) I use google news to get news from all over the world, and examine both sides of an issue. Iw as merely pointing out an obvious hole in a source that should be disregarded. So many people act like "if your not for Israel you are for terrorists" Is just disgusting. So, I believe it is you who should give ME a break.


EDIT: Wait a minute, WHAT palestinian coverage?Yes and all the several news sources found through Google news are completely unbiased of course. I don't think I will give you the break, because I also don't remember accusing you of "not being for Israel so being for terrorists". Unless if you read between the lines, which you seem so good at with international news reports :)

Palestinian coverage is all around you. Go and see honestreporting.com; check out "The Photo That Started It All". (Of course, all Zionist lies and plots :)).

Yes and all the several news sources found through Google news are completely unbiased of course.

NO. This is what is great about Google news, it has links to many points of view on a given subject, usually by comparing several biased reports you can ascertain the facts.

I don't think I will give you the break, because I also don't remember accusing you of "not being for Israel so being for terrorists". Unless if you read between the lines, which you seem so good at with international news reports :)

You did not say that, its true, but your comment about how Palestinian reporting isn't any better is the same sort of sentiment. Sorry I should have said "If you don't believe Israeli reporting you must believe Palestinian reporting"


Palestinian coverage is all around you. Go and see honestreporting.com; check out "The Photo That Started It All". (Of course, all Zionist lies and plots :)).

I was talking about official Palestinian coverage, not the New York Times. I refuse to get into a "liberal media" debate with you so don't bother with this. I read many news sources and I attempt to be aware of biases so as to better ascertain the facts.

Nice (thinly) veiled attempt to call me a conspiracy theorist, why didn't you go for the whole shebang? Oh yeah, you realized it make you sound stupid...

Exactly!Stephistan, earlier you stated a young man blowing himself up is the same as the Israeli force firing a missile in a crowd. The young man however wants to take with him as many people as he can (preferably Jews, if Arabs are among them, ah! more martyrs for the cause). A missile is not, as I gather, randomly fired. It has - as tends to be the case with missiles - a target. And that target cannot be, I believe, a random civilian living in for example the Gaza strip. If innocent bystanders die due to the missile, it is an unfortunate and deplorable fact. In fact, the whole missile business seems to me not worthy of a true democratic state. Then again, the situation IS exceptional.

Being desperate is one thing. If it is manifested by randomly killing innocent civilians, then in my view it is terrorism. Don't forget that the "better alternative" also involves martyrhood, instant heroism and a lot of cash for the next of kin.

Just for the sake of argument, let's reverse the current situation. Palestinians tomorrow hold the exact position the Israeli's are holding now (infrastructure, weaponry and land). And the Israeli's can go live in Gaza and the West Bank. How many Israeli's would actually make it alive till the next day you think? Honestly.

There lies the difference.

Nice (thinly) veiled attempt to call me a conspiracy theorist, why didn't you go for the whole shebang? Oh yeah, you realized it make you sound stupid...Is it my imagination or are you easily offended? :)

"I read many news sources and I attempt to be aware of biases so as to better ascertain the facts", you say. A mature and positive approach! So why do you get so upset when one particular (biased) news source (Facts of Israel) omits a certain fact ? Or, do you not only try to get a better understanding of the facts that way, but do you also try to rectify the mistakes and omissions you encounter? If that's so, you must be a very busy person! :)

I'm not here to attack you, you know. I just find this topic quite interesting.

Israel.

They won in 1948 when just a fledgling state. They won in 1967 and 1973. As far as I'm concerned they've earned the right to live there through superior force of arms and sheer determination. Jews lived there long before 1948, across all of the Middle East there were Sephardic Jews. Most of them were later kicked out of most Arab states. Israel was also originally supported by the Soviet Union (the primary party at the time was a Marxist party with ties to the SU). Later on it all changed when the Soviet Union began throwing Jews out and they moved from Eastern Europe to the Soviet Union. Sharon was once a Polish Jew trained at the Polish Military Academia, along with a substantial amount of the current military leaders.

Palestinians have been extremely poorly led. Arafat and by extension, Fatah, are poor choices. Arafat has throughout the decades placed his money on the wrong horse. He supported the Soviet Union, the plane hijackings in the '70's, and Saddam during the first Gulf War. He has corrupted the leadership of the Palestinians with his own thugs and family members. The current problems in Gaza with his own people rioting against him are just cause for him to be removed.

Fact of the matter is; Palestine did not exist as a state before 1948. The British opted to pass the land unto whoever could garner the greatest amount of votes in a referendum, which later turned out to be useless as the Israelis decided to announce their independence, because the voting had been skewed against them by Saudi meddling. Palestine used to be a province of the Ottoman Empire and those people who lived there were for the most part Arabs, Christians and Jews. The notion of "Palestinians" only started in the 1960's when the U.N. embarked on a search for a cultural heritage to those Arabs who lived there.

The Palestinians forfeited any sympathy I may have had towards them when they attempted to unseat King Hussein I in Jordan. He offered them Jordanian citizenship and they refused.