NationStates Jolt Archive

As "both" is not an option, I will not vote.In truth, I don't support either, sorry.Yah, where's the "both of them got some splainin to do" option? since half the first page begs for more options i will post a full POLL.

BTW...here is the link for the original (2 options) poll.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?t=446612

I support for the most part Israel position. However I believe Palestinians need a state. With that said. Jordan/Egypt/Syria need to take there responsibilities in the Palestinian problem. I dont think the Israel should be the only ones giving up territory for a Palestinian state. Also I believe Jeruselem should be a city state. There official state religion being Jewish,Muslim and Christian in no particular order. Independent from Israel and Palestinian control.

Also I believe Jeruselem should be a city state. There official state religion being Jewish,Muslim and Christian in no particular order. Independent from Israel and Palestinian control.that is really a good idea.

I support the idea that both should be sovereign nations.

Other than that I give issue based support to both parties. I support Israeli security measures (fence, checkpoints etc) but not the disproportionate retaliation doctrine.

I support Palestinian right for statehood, but not their demands of dismantling Israel and their method of using terrorism as a tool.

I support other.

Both should exist, but I doubt they'll ever really want peace.

Notice that people aren't afraid to say "I'm all for Israel" in the poll, but no one actually dares saying "I'm for Palestine"...they rather say "Other", or "They both have to improve"

Strange really...

I'm for both, and against the rabble of tyrants that surround them and start up the wars.

I support not touching this issue with a 10-foot pole. :)

There we go - 1 vote for Palestine (and it's not by me...I chose Other for reasons no longer known to me) ;)

I'm all for Israel and I am not afraid to say it! And we should bomb the hell out of Palestine.

~Satanic Reverend Medivh~

Now it's 4 vs 3.

I stand corrected. :p

Support? Its not like they are friggin football teams. Just thought I'd be obnoxious for a change

Kick them both out and give it to the Kurds.

I support Palestine, but only because I hate Israel.
Of course, I hate every nation that collaborated with the South African apartheid government, which means I've got a lot of hate to spread around.

I voted other, since blame can be attributed to both sides.

Were I forced to choose, however, I would support Israel.

The 1947 UN Partition Plan was a damn good idea, and gave the Palestinians everything they're currently asking for.

Perhaps it needed to be refined, but it was the Palestinans (in part due to influence from surrounding Arab states), that ultimatley rejected the idea.

Sad really...what resulted from that decision...stubborn idiots on both sides. :(

It's a vicious cycle.
The Palestinians hate the Israelis for, essentially, taking their country.
So extremist militant minority groups take matters into their own hands by attacking the Israelis as suicide bombers.
The Israelis respond with righteous fury and overly heavy-handed tactics, including missile strikes and armed incursions.
The massive loss of civilian life pushes a few more idealists/extremists over the edge into becoming 'freedom fighters' and 'martyrs' for the cause of liberating their land and people (see suicide bombers).
And the cycle continues.

Though I place more blame on the Israelis, since it is easier to prevent the national army from slaughtering innocents than it is to prevent militant religious extremists from dying for their cause.

Kick them both out and give it to the Kurds.I agree

hay guys wuts going on in this thread

Leaning towards Israel, but not full support. I think Palestinians should have equal representation, etc. Don't make it a Jewish government, but a joint one.

The land was never Britain's to give away — the British leaders swore on their honor to protect Arab independence following WWI, and they failed in their sacred obligation. Because of this, I believe ALL Arab territories occupied by the British, including Palestine (isn't it nice to know the British defaulted on the McMahon-Hussein oaths?) became FREE as a result of British backstabbing, as opposed to becoming legitimately British. The three arguments that support the existence of "Israel" are all garbage, as I shall explain below. Thus, there is no such country as "Israel," and it's just a very well-defended and illegal beachhead.

Argument 1:

God said Israel belongs to the Jews.

Rebuttal 1:

Prove it, Shlomo. Oh right, that's a matter of faith, not politics.


Argument 2:

The Jews were there first.

Rebuttal 2:

The Torah disagree — the Caananites were first.


Argument 3:

The U.N. legitimately created "Israel."

Rebuttal 3:

The U.N. never administered Palestine.


If any of this is weak, please blast me. Before I blast you.

CUZ I'M TNT! I'M DYNAMITE!

The land was never Britain's to give away — the British leaders swore on their honor to protect Arab independence following WWI, and they failed in their sacred obligation. Because of this, I believe ALL Arab territories occupied by the British, including Palestine (isn't it nice to know the British defaulted on the McMahon-Hussein oaths?) became FREE as a result of British backstabbing, as opposed to becoming legitimately British. The three arguments that support the existence of "Israel" are all garbage, as I shall explain below. Thus, there is no such country as "Israel," and it's just a very well-defended and illegal beachhead.

Argument 1:

God said Israel belongs to the Jews.

Rebuttal 1:

Prove it, Shlomo. Oh right, that's a matter of faith, not politics.


Argument 2:

The Jews were there first.

Rebuttal 2:

The Torah disagree — the Caananites were first.


Argument 3:

The U.N. legitimately created "Israel."

Rebuttal 3:

The U.N. never administered Palestine.


If any of this is weak, please blast me. Before I blast you.

CUZ I'M TNT! I'M DYNAMITE!
If all of these are weak, will you blast yourself?

Kick them both out and give it to the Kurds.
Horses arse if anyone should get it it should be Catholics!
I say bring back the Kingdoms of Odessa and Tyre and whatever!

I voted Palestine.

Maybe this is the right thread to discuss what's happening there right now...

Israel removed the Settlers from Gaza:
Awesome, I couldn't agree more. No one ever listens to me in Politics these days, so I say: :)

Hamas shoots missiles at Israel:
Seldomly have I seen something as stupid. Can't they control their members? There's a ceasefire on!!!

Since then - Israel attacks Gaza:
Great. What exactly does this achieve? Nothing. Now Al-Aqsa Martyrs Inc. says it cancels the ceasefire. Just great.

Sometimes Israel needs to differentiate between different groups of Palestinians, really. Now their punishing everyone, including themselves, for the actions of a few demented individuals.
But at least it's a good excuse not to talk about the West Bank...

Since then - Israel attacks Gaza:
Great. What exactly does this achieve? Nothing. Now Al-Aqsa Martyrs Inc. says it cancels the ceasefire. Just great.

Sometimes Israel needs to differentiate between different groups of Palestinians, really. Now their punishing everyone, including themselves, for the actions of a few demented individuals.
But at least it's a good excuse not to talk about the West Bank...
What're they supposed to do? Sit idly while the Palestinian Authority fails to prevent Kassam rockets from falling on Israeli territory and threatening Israeli lives?

Personally, from my point of view, they are both as bad as each other. If they can't agree on both nations being free and soverign, then they should leave and we'll sink the whole damn place.

A sort of "If you can't agree, then neither of you can have it!"

What're they supposed to do? Sit idly while the Palestinian Authority fails to prevent Kassam rockets from falling on Israeli territory and threatening Israeli lives?
As harsh as it sounds, yes.
They should help the PA in its work. They need a serious upgrade.

But they should primarily ask themselves whether they're actually doing anything with that kind of response. I don't think they are. They can destroy houses suspected of being bomb factories, they can kill people suspected of being militants - but they can't stop anyone from taking their rocket, walking up to the field and shooting it over the border. They'd be foolish to think they could stop people from building their rocket...the actual factories are probably underground anyways.
For the time being though they only cause more trouble for themselves.

hmm, i would have supported palestine when this first started, but i dont think that there is any just reason for blowing anyone up, on either side. there is no sanctity of life there now. this goes to show that borders cannot be changed unless the people on either side want it to. take vietnam, korea, iraq, world war 1 and 2, it all shows.

has anyone read shadow of the giant? the FPE is the only chance of working!

As harsh as it sounds, yes.
They should help the PA in its work. They need a serious upgrade.

But they should primarily ask themselves whether they're actually doing anything with that kind of response. I don't think they are. They can destroy houses suspected of being bomb factories, they can kill people suspected of being militants - but they can't stop anyone from taking their rocket, walking up to the field and shooting it over the border. They'd be foolish to think they could stop people from building their rocket...the actual factories are probably underground anyways.
For the time being though they only cause more trouble for themselves.As happy as I am that Israel pulled out of Gaza strip, the occupation did prevent rockets from being fired.
A wonderful problem is that Hamas is celebrating this as a victorious rout of the IDF and wants to show that they're going to push the offensive. There isn't really that much "help" Israel can give the PA without undermining its sovereignity even more or inciting the population against the "traitors" and giving Hamas even more support...

The notion of "Palestine" is ridiculous. "Palestine" has never existed as a nation. "Palestine" is latin for "Land of the Philistines." Judeah/Israel were named "Palestine" by the Romans as a slap in the face to the conquered jews. At the time of the Roman's conquest the Phillistines had been extinct for over one and a half millenia. Send the arabs back to Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt, where they came from. "Palestine" does not exist.

There isn't really that much "help" Israel can give the PA without undermining its sovereignity even more or inciting the population against the "traitors" and giving Hamas even more support...
Yep, it's a tricky bugger, that one!

Why kick the Arabs out of Israel you ask? When Israel was created and even before then, arabs had started to kick Jews out of their nations, it's just payback, it's only fair.

Why kick the Arabs out of Israel you ask? When Israel was created and even before then, arabs had started to kick Jews out of their nations, it's just payback, it's only fair.What about the occupied territories?

Why kick the Arabs out of Israel you ask? When Israel was created and even before then, arabs had started to kick Jews out of their nations, it's just payback, it's only fair.
The only Arabs in Israel are there as cheap labour for a country that sadly lacks all kinds of stuff...you mean the occupied territories.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/7A9BF40C-7B77-408A-A13F-2282706FF02F/0/MFAJ0d1q0.jpg

The notion of "Palestine" is ridiculous. "Palestine" has never existed as a nation. "Palestine" is latin for "Land of the Philistines." Judeah/Israel were named "Palestine" by the Romans as a slap in the face to the conquered jews. At the time of the Roman's conquest the Phillistines had been extinct for over one and a half millenia. Send the arabs back to Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, and Egypt, where they came from. "Palestine" does not exist.

my thoughts exactly

What about the occupied territories?

Officially, by U.N. law, the Gaza Strip belongs to Egypt, and it is good we withdrew. The West Bank, however, is a different story. During the Six Day War, the nation of Jordan owned the West Bank. The Israelis captured it from Jordan, and layed claim over it, Israel being the defenders ((not in the normal sense of the word)) could legally do this. Although, the Jodanis still claimed it, so it was considered an occupied territory. When Jordan stopped claiming the West Bank was theirs, it was officially Israeli, and not an occupied territory.

And, anyway,

To your descendants I have given this land, From the river of Egypt [the Nile River] as far as the great river, the river Euphrates
Genesis 15:18, NAS

http://www.familybible.org/Articles/IssuesAndEvents/Images/CovenantLand.jpg

To your descendants I have given this land, From the river of Egypt [the Nile River] as far as the great river, the river Euphrates
Genesis 15:18, NAS
It's a good thing the Bible isn't a legally binding document...

And, anyway,

To your descendants I have given this land, From the river of Egypt [the Nile River] as far as the great river, the river Euphrates
Genesis 15:18, NASGah... It was claimed by Al Qaeda that creating "Greater Israel" was the main cause of the Iraq war...

Gah... It was claimed by Al Qaeda that creating "Greater Israel" was the main cause of the Iraq war...

Al Qaeda also claimed the U.S. caused the tsunami.

And besides:

Gen 15:18
In the same day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:

Gen 15:19
The Kenites, and the Kenizzites, and the Kadmonites,

Gen 15:20
And the Hittites, and the Perizzites, and the Rephaims,

Gen 15:21
And the Amorites, and the Canaanites, and the Girgashites, and the Jebusites.

Take your pick

Al Qaeda also claimed the U.S. caused the tsunami.got a link on that?

got a link on that?
Indeed. First I've heard of such claims.

If all of these are weak, will you blast yourself?

Yeah, on an "Israeli" bus :D

The only Arabs in Israel are there as cheap labour for a country that sadly lacks all kinds of stuff...you mean the occupied territories.

http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/rdonlyres/7A9BF40C-7B77-408A-A13F-2282706FF02F/0/MFAJ0d1q0.jpg
Well, they and over a million Arabs who are full Israeli citizens of course.

Suffice to say I think both sides should just kiss and make up, because both sides are pretty much wrong.As of now,it doesn´t matter who actually started the conflict,but rather who´s willing to end it.And who´s NOT...

Indeed. First I've heard of such claims.


ive heard that one before also actually

I support neither. Both have done some pretty low-down awful things.

Ok, I'm with the palestinians on this issue...

Every nation [let's not start with history, let's look at the present; atm, when the palestinians have a sense of nationality] has the right to become an independent nation with its own borders, government,... Basically, a state.

When a nation has a clear majority in an area, then they can bloody well have the area, otherwise rebellions will start [just check what happened in Slovenia when foreign nations tried to turn us into their own (germans - we kicked their asses without foreign support, yugoslav army - defeated in 10 days while it was at its prime, while it took nato 3 months of bombing to subdue them)].

In the particular case of palestine... they have the clear majority in the region, and they're willing to fight and die for it (obviously). Unfortunately they're not being given what they want (jerusalem,...), and as long as that happens fight will continue, because the harder you try to punish the population, the more it will resist [germans killed 10 civilians for every soldier that we killed, we lost around 1/10 of our population - as slovenians... our soldiers were called bandits and terrorists... but in the end we won].

Basically; screw the bible, screw history and look what the situation is at the moment... palestinians here, israelis there... put them apart, let them do whatever they want where they have the majority population [while giving ppl from the other side a way to move out].

As for Jerusalem... I got a nasty, unethical and very immoral idea [joke... before everyone attacks me]; partially stolen from George Carlin:

Evacuate the city, put a big wall around it with 4 entrances... one for the christians, one for the jews, one for the muslims, and one for everyone else... then give every person that wants to go in an AK47 and a couple hand granades [+ammo]. If they want the city so much they can kill each other without civilians getting in the way [a good way to get rid of religious freaks who advocate death chaos and destruction + their followers].

But the true Palestinians ((The Phillistines)) have been culturally and physically extinct for over 3000 years! These people are arabs, they can only lay claim to Arabia. We are Israelites, we can lay claim to Israel.

every time I want to feel support for the palestinian cause they do something dumb ..like firing rockets into Israel from land they FINALY negotiated through the peace proccess. All that fucking effort and then ...there you go ...assholes with rockets . :rolleyes:
See the next time you get support for concessions ...fucking idiots! ...this kills me .

I do not support them, they are Wrong.

They both have too much blood on their hands for me to support either side. The paranoia and lack of restraint of military power on the part of Israel shocks me, and the bloodthirsty anti-Jewish zealotry of the Palestinians makes me sick.

But the true Palestinians ((The Phillistines)) have been culturally and physically extinct for over 3000 years! These people are arabs, they can only lay claim to Arabia. We are Israelites, we can lay claim to Israel.


Try sticking to the places where you have the ethnical majority... not where "god" told you to be, it'll be a lot less bloody if you do... read my post above to see what I'm talking about.

Well, they and over a million Arabs who are full Israeli citizens of course.
Ahem, well yes of course. I wonder when Koroka talks about kicking all the Arabs out....

But the true Palestinians ((The Phillistines)) have been culturally and physically extinct for over 3000 years! These people are arabs, they can only lay claim to Arabia. We are Israelites, we can lay claim to Israel.
These people are Arabs the same way the French are Europeans. Are you saying French people shouldn't have a country, they can just go and live with the other Europeans?

As for the Israelites...you are an Israeli (I assume), the way I am a German. You aren't an Israelite anymore than I am a Cheruskan. 3000 years of sharing one's gene pool with other peoples tends to do that.

You know...i was going to make a profound post, full of facts...and statements. Then i thought...why bother. No-one ever listens. I know i'm right. That is the end of it.

The only thing i shall do now, is sit and watch people bicker over changing the equation of 1+1=2, to 1+1=anything else but 2.

The only thing i shall do now, is sit and watch people bicker over changing the equation of 1+1=2, to 1+1=anything else but 2.
1 = (-1)² = sqrt(-1²) = sqrt(-1*-1) = sqrt(-1) * sqrt(-1) = i * i = i² = -1

Thus 1+1 = ...hmmm, zero.

until we (america) stop giving israel money, im all for palestine

1. -1+-1=-2
2. 1=1.

The number 1 is not a concept, where you can make it different things. Such as Pi=3.1416.

I could call it %=3.1416, it would not change the concept of pi. But the number stays the same.

So...point is 1=1 always.

Otherwise your re-writing the whole concept of 1 to begin with.

Otherwise your re-writing the whole concept of 1 to begin with.
:D
Tell me rather why my "proof" doesn't work...and besides, I'm not being serious.

:D
Tell me rather why my "proof" doesn't work...and besides, I'm not being serious.

I already said why...

according to your formula 1= -1 right?

=-1+-1
=-1-1
=-2

=)

I'm glad, you have decided to unofficaly boycott this thread, by not taking it seriously either. =D

Or...did i misinterpert? =(

1 = (-1)² = sqrt(-1²) = sqrt(-1*-1) = sqrt(-1) * sqrt(-1) = i * i = i² = -1

Thus 1+1 = ...hmmm, zero.

Who taught you maths? :rolleyes: every time you do x²=4 for example you have two possible solutions for x (x=2 / x=-2)
By doing 1 = (-1)² you already made the mistake, because the two are not neccesarely the same (only half of the possible solution) - technically its true that one of the solutions is 1... but there's always the deal with imaginary numbers ;)

every time you do x²=4 for example you have two possible solutions for x (x=2 / x=-2)
By doing 1 = (-1)² you already made the mistake, because the two are not neccesarely the same (only half of the possible solution) - technically its true that one of the solutions is 1...
You get a cookie for citing the right answer!

Simple. America should conquer all the Middle East. Problem solved.

Before anyone goes on trying to defend "Israel," I'd like to see a rebuttal of my own arguments on page 2. If I haven't put to rest the notion of an extant Jewish state, I'd like to know why ;)

The land was never Britain's to give away — the British leaders swore on their honor to protect Arab independence following WWI, and they failed in their sacred obligation. Because of this, I believe ALL Arab territories occupied by the British, including Palestine (isn't it nice to know the British defaulted on the McMahon-Hussein oaths?) became FREE as a result of British backstabbing, as opposed to becoming legitimately British. The three arguments that support the existence of "Israel" are all garbage, as I shall explain below. Thus, there is no such country as "Israel," and it's just a very well-defended and illegal beachhead.!
Palestine wasn't British--it was a British mandate. Certainly the Brits were administering the mandate under the auspices of the League of Nations--'promises' do not count.


Argument 1:

God said Israel belongs to the Jews.

Rebuttal 1:

Prove it, Shlomo. Oh right, that's a matter of faith, not politics.
God? Who is that?


Argument 2:

The Jews were there first.

Rebuttal 2:

The Torah disagree — the Caananites were first.
The Canaanites? Probably. So what?


Argument 3:

The U.N. legitimately created "Israel."

Rebuttal 3:

The U.N. never administered Palestine.
The British did. They referred the matter to a legitimate successor of the League of Nations.


If any of this is weak, please blast me. Before I blast you.

CUZ I'M TNT! I'M DYNAMITE!
Dynamite? Be careful, then.

Palestine wasn't British--it was a British mandate. Certainly the Brits were administering the mandate under the auspices of the League of Nations--'promises' do not count.

Palestine was never a British mandate — they made a contract with the Arabs that if they fought the Turks, they would support independence for most Arab lands. They didn't, so any agreement placing Palestine in British hands was voided when Britain decided to administer other Arab lands themselves.

If you break a contract, why should the other party be obligated to recognize it?

Before anyone goes on trying to defend "Israel," I'd like to see a rebuttal of my own arguments on page 2. If I haven't put to rest the notion of an extant Jewish state, I'd like to know why ;)

The American Indians didnt give me the right to live here , yet try to move me . You want a million other examples through history ? Israel exist it has the means to enforce its rights to exist against those who feel otherwise. Same as GERMANY , FRANCE , Great Britain and on and on . When you have the means to remove a nation off the Earth then you can determine if its extant or not . Otherwise your just jerking off in an intellectual way .

Iraq exist yet it never did at all in history nor did Kuwait and other countries brought into existence by colonial powers . How about India and Pakistan and Kashmir ? What right did Britain have or any other country to draw any border ?

^none.But they won´t budge so we deal with the facts as they are...

atm this shows that there are 30 jews to evvery 32 people with a critical analysis on nationstates

^ lmao.Those 30 don´t have to be jews.Jew != Israeli citizen.I´ll go with the rabbis and say both sides are piled to the rigging with dipshits.

Palestine was never a British mandate — they made a contract with the Arabs that if they fought the Turks, they would support independence for most Arab lands. They didn't, so any agreement placing Palestine in British hands was voided when Britain decided to administer other Arab lands themselves.

If you break a contract, why should the other party be obligated to recognize it?

There was a mandate-- http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/palmanda.htm
The broken promises to the Arab leaders of 1915 does not matter at all here--the British reneged on them in 1916 (the Sykes-Picot Agreement), as they did quite often. The League of Nations was not concerned at all with these promises and made its decision to place Palestine under British rule.

There was a mandate-- http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/mideast/palmanda.htm
The broken promises to the Arab leaders of 1915 does not matter at all here--the British reneged on them in 1916 (the Sykes-Picot Agreement), as they did quite often. The League of Nations was not concerned at all with these promises and made its decision to place Palestine under British rule.

Does it matter if I decide to give your house to your neighbor?

Does it matter if I decide to give your house to your neighbor?
I have none. :D

Simple. America should conquer all the Middle East. Problem solved.
I have a nasty feeling that you are serious.

I have none. :D

Don't be thick. Neither have I.

Don't be thick. Neither have I.
I'd rather be thick than indulge in oversimplification.

I'd rather be thick than indulge in oversimplification.

What else is involved? Really. Did some Arab leader I've never heard of agree to hand over every scrap of Arab Land to the European powers?

What else is involved? Really. Did some Arab leader I've never heard of agree to hand over every scrap of Arab Land to the European powers?
Sigh.

The Arab leaders were not sovereigns of Palestine in 1915--the Ottoman Empire was. According to the terms of the Treaty of Sevres (1920) Palestine, among other lands, was ceded as a mandate to the Allied powers.

So it was not some Arab leader--it was Sultan Muhammad Khan VI, 36th Sovereign of the House of Osman, Sultan of Sultans, Khan of Khans, Commander of the Faithful and Successor of the Prophet of the Lord of the Universe, Protector of the Holy Cities of Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem, Emperor of the three Cities of Constantinople, Adrianople and Bursa, and of the Cities of Damascus and Cairo, of all Azerbaijan, of the Magris, of Barka, of Kairuan, of Aleppo, of Arabic Iraq and of Ajim, of Basra, of El Hasa, of Dilen, of Raka, of Mosul, of Parthia, of Diyarbakir, of Cicilia, of the Vilayets of Erzurum, of Sivas, of Adana, of Karaman, Van, of Barbary, of Abyssinia, of Tunisia, of Tripoli, of Damascus, of Cyprus, of Rhodes, of Candia, of the Vilayet of the Morea, of the Marmara Sea, the Black Sea and also its coasts, of Anatolia, of Rumelia, Baghdad, Kurdistan, Greece, Turkistan, Tartary, Circassia, of the two regions of Kabarda, of Georgia, of the plain of Kypshak, of the whole country of the Tartars, of Kefa and of all the neighbouring countries, of Bosnia and its dependencies, of the City and Fort of Belgrade, of the Vilayet of Serbia, with all the castles, forts and cities, of all Albania, of all Iflak and Bogdania, as well as all the dependencies and borders, and many others countries and cities.

thanks for the title

did you ejaculate typing it? (or copying and pasting it?) I know I did reading it. There's a lot of extremely relevant and valuable information in there. :D

Anyway, the Arabs had already reclaimed much of the territory the Ottoman Empire tried to surrender to the League of Nations. It would be a dirty trick to try and rationalize this theft of land by saying that it was administered by the Ottoman Turks at the time of the Treaty. That is, you STILL can't give away land that doesn't belong to you. And considering the oppression faced by the Arabs under Ottoman rule, I would not imagine challenging the legitimacy of the Arab Revolt.

I support Israel 100%. They have rights to that land. I hear the argument that the Pal. derserve that land 'cuz Israel stole it from them in 1948, however if one thinks about it israel was a nation some 2000 yrs ago... so that gives them rights...Also Those lands that the bastard Sharon gave up is rightfully Israel's through conquest of war..Just as the SW Us belongs to america through war....Finally The arabs don't want to have two seperate states...they won't be happy until Israel is completly destroyed.

PLO :gundge:
Hamas :gundge:
Islamic Jihad :gundge:
Israel :fluffle:

I support Israel 100%. They have rights to that land. I hear the argument that the Pal. derserve that land 'cuz Israel stole it from them in 1948, however if one thinks about it israel was a nation some 2000 yrs ago... so that gives them rights...Also Those lands that the bastard Sharon gave up is rightfully Israel's through conquest of war..Just as the SW Us belongs to america through war....Finally The arabs don't want to have two seperate states...they won't be happy until Israel is completly destroyed.



Ugh.... not again....

Although it'd like to highlight this piece because no matter what your stance is re Israel/Palestine- it is illegal under international law and has been since about the end of WWI.

they won't be happy until Israel is completly destroyed.

Neither will I :P

thanks for the title

did you ejaculate typing it? (or copying and pasting it?) I know I did reading it. There's a lot of extremely relevant and valuable information in there. :D

...
Mr Dynamite, apparently, is aflame now...

Mr Dynamite, apparently, is aflame now...

clever, i guess

now quit dickin' around and tell me why I'm wrong

thanks for the title

did you ejaculate typing it? (or copying and pasting it?) I know I did reading it. There's a lot of extremely relevant and valuable information in there. :D

Anyway, the Arabs had already reclaimed much of the territory the Ottoman Empire tried to surrender to the League of Nations. It would be a dirty trick to try and rationalize this theft of land by saying that it was administered by the Ottoman Turks at the time of the Treaty. That is, you STILL can't give away land that doesn't belong to you. And considering the oppression faced by the Arabs under Ottoman rule, I would not imagine challenging the legitimacy of the Arab Revolt.

Who but the Israelis ( not all Israelis ! ) doubt the legitimacy of the Palestinians claims ? Two groups claim ownership to the same land . Either there is a compromise or they kill until one side is defeated and can no longer press its claim or the other option they both learn to live together . Its not that hard and it is that hard .

clever, i guess

now quit dickin' around and tell me why I'm wrong
I've been feeding a troll for too long.

Ugh.... not again....

Although it'd like to highlight this piece because no matter what your stance is re Israel/Palestine- it is illegal under international law and has been since about the end of WWI.

So call the international cops and report it .

I support Palestine, frankly. But mostly I blame the British. Their "A land without people for a people without land" idea caused this whole mess! The Jewish settlers could move there, I had no problem with that. The problem I have is that they established a state where their religion was forced upon the inhabitants who had been living there for many thousands of years. That area was a generally friendly area before, where Christians, Muslims, and Jews lived side-by-side in a generally happy atmosphere. However, the establishment of Israel ruined all that. Now, I'm not for the destruction of Israel or anything, but I believe the Palestinians should deffinetly control Gaza and the West Bank. And east Jerusalem.

here is my argument for why israil is in the wrong place let us compare for a second the lands of israil and palistine in respect to the us back in 1948. now we will look at the us say one day a very powerfull country ordered all us citesens to move the the very outer fringes of the us into the most hostile and hard to live in placeses of the us and gave all the land to the indians because it was their all so many hundreds of years ago but we still got to keep washington dc. then all of a sudden more indians move into the land that is washington dc and claim that as their own and the other powerfull country forcing he us into such a postion lets them take it how would you feel as a us person. you would feel very mad and try to do anything to get back what you feel to be rightly yours. this is the best comparison posible since they have both been living in these lands since biblical times and are not very comparable but you get the idea. that is why i do not support israle because they used other people to take it for them under false pretences and then went beyound what was agread for them from the begining. technicaly they should not be anywere in jerusalem they own nothing of it in accordance with the 1948 UN treaty. but i am against the palistiniance for their methods

Neither will I :P
Then you are doomed to a sad life because Israel isn't going anywhere.

Sigh.

The Arab leaders were not sovereigns of Palestine in 1915--the Ottoman Empire was. According to the terms of the Treaty of Sevres (1920) Palestine, among other lands, was ceded as a mandate to the Allied powers.

So it was not some Arab leader--it was Sultan Muhammad Khan VI, 36th Sovereign of the House of Osman, Sultan of Sultans, Khan of Khans, Commander of the Faithful and Successor of the Prophet of the Lord of the Universe, Protector of the Holy Cities of Mecca, Medina and Jerusalem, Emperor of the three Cities of Constantinople, Adrianople and Bursa, and of the Cities of Damascus and Cairo, of all Azerbaijan, of the Magris, of Barka, of Kairuan, of Aleppo, of Arabic Iraq and of Ajim, of Basra, of El Hasa, of Dilen, of Raka, of Mosul, of Parthia, of Diyarbakir, of Cicilia, of the Vilayets of Erzurum, of Sivas, of Adana, of Karaman, Van, of Barbary, of Abyssinia, of Tunisia, of Tripoli, of Damascus, of Cyprus, of Rhodes, of Candia, of the Vilayet of the Morea, of the Marmara Sea, the Black Sea and also its coasts, of Anatolia, of Rumelia, Baghdad, Kurdistan, Greece, Turkistan, Tartary, Circassia, of the two regions of Kabarda, of Georgia, of the plain of Kypshak, of the whole country of the Tartars, of Kefa and of all the neighbouring countries, of Bosnia and its dependencies, of the City and Fort of Belgrade, of the Vilayet of Serbia, with all the castles, forts and cities, of all Albania, of all Iflak and Bogdania, as well as all the dependencies and borders, and many others countries and cities.

Quite true, however we ought to consider that British diplomats promised the region of Palestine, concurrent to Judea and Jerusalem, and autonomy, to the Arabic peoples therin, were they to fight against the Ottoman empire, and to influential American Jews to procure American involvement in the great war. Furthermore, The Jewish settlers resorted to terrorism and insurrection prior to 1947 to faciliate British withdrawal, and were accordingly, to an extent, the original terrorists in the region.

Personally, however, I favour Israel on principle, after all, the Jews were there originally in Babylonian and Egyptian epochs.

the palistininas were there to back in the days of the jews being in egypt have you forgoten about jerico and david and golioth and all of those stries out of the old testement the palistenians were there from the beging as well.

Piekrom']the palistininas were there to back in the days of the jews being in egypt have you forgoten about jerico and david and golioth and all of those stries out of the old testement the palistenians were there from the beging as well.

But I seem to remeber Islam being founded in the 600's AD, not 2000 BC, and one can accordingly surmise that if the Palestinians oppose Israeli presence upon grounds of faith, then we are compelled to support Judaism.

I support Palestine, frankly. But mostly I blame the British. Their "A land without people for a people without land" idea caused this whole mess! The Jewish settlers could move there, I had no problem with that. The problem I have is that they established a state where their religion was forced upon the inhabitants who had been living there for many thousands of years. That area was a generally friendly area before, where Christians, Muslims, and Jews lived side-by-side in a generally happy atmosphere. However, the establishment of Israel ruined all that. Now, I'm not for the destruction of Israel or anything, but I believe the Palestinians should deffinetly control Gaza and the West Bank. And east Jerusalem.

Oh but Pakistan can be created on the same basis (a seperate homeland for muslims) and other muslims can move there and they can establish a state where their religion can be forced upon the inhabitants who have been living there for many thousand years.

That area was also a generally friendly area before, where muslims, sikhs and hindus lived side-by-side in a generally happy atmosphere. However the establishement of Pakistan ruined all that.

Pakistan is now a sovereign nation and you apparently like that nation and were batting for it very enthusiatically. But somehow Israel is an abomination and its creation caused the "mess".

Oh, the irony.... :D

Oh but Pakistan can be created on the same basis (a seperate homeland for muslims) and other muslims can move there and they can establish a state where their religion can be forced upon the inhabitants who have been living there for many thousand years.

That area was also a generally friendly area before, where muslims, sikhs and hindus lived side-by-side in a generally happy atmosphere. However the establishement of Pakistan ruined all that.

Pakistan is now a sovereign nation and you apparently like that nation and were batting for it very enthusiatically. But somehow Israel is an abomination and its creation caused the "mess".

Oh, the irony.... :D

Oy! This is a Palestine-Israel thread! Not Pakistan-India (Although they do start with the same letters *gorsp*!)

1. Muslims were the majority there when the partition happened. The areas that did NOT have a muslim majority and the people did NOT accept being part of Pakistan(eastern Punjab, for example) were allowed to stay with India.

2. I am not a fan of the partition. I would have rather that the partition never happened. However, it did happen, and we have to get past that and work on re-building relationships. Like with Israel, I would like the lands that have a majority of Muslims to go to the Muslims and a majority of Hindu's to go to the Hindu lands. Thankfully, that part already happened(the princely states with Hindu populations were admited into India, and although it was due to the fact that the Indian army had to forcefully remove the Muslim minority, it still happened. All the princely states with Muslim majorities, save one, were allowed into Pakistan. As we all know, the Indians prevented one of the Princely states from joining Pakistan, even though it had a very large Muslim majority, and still does today). After that has happened, both sides will have the land they want, so land disputes won't get in the way of negotiations, and will lead to the eventual re-unification.

2. I am not a fan of the partition. I would have rather that the partition never happened. However, it did happen, and we have to get past that and work on re-building relationships.

Likewise, Israel has happened.

It is time Palestinians and their backers realise that and get past it and work on getting a state for themselves (which is their inalienable right and I fully support).

It is the stubborn refusal of Palestinians to recognise Israel's right to exist (or rather the reality of Israel's existence) and the malicious intent of keeping the pot boiling by the various Arab "leaders" that is causing the vicious cycle to continue.


1. Muslims were the majority there when the partition happened. The areas that did NOT have a muslim majority and the people did NOT accept being part of Pakistan(eastern Punjab, for example) were allowed to stay with India.

Did not the UN partition the state and demarked areas for a Palestinian state?

Why did the Palestinians and their Arab backers reject the UN sanctioned partition?


All the princely states with Muslim majorities, save one, were allowed into Pakistan. As we all know, the Indians prevented one of the Princely states from joining Pakistan

Of course, let us all forget that the said princely state was invaded by Pakistan first. ;)

And remember that we do not agree that muslims need a seperate state. We accept the creation of Pakistan, but we do not agree with the reason behind the creation of Pakistan. Hence, we hold NO obligation to Pakistan to give them anything, let alone a piece of land.

I have two suggestions.

Either
(a) ONE, secular, completely integrated state. Write the name "Israel" but PRONOUNCE it "Palestine" or
(b) Take all the Unionists from Northern Ireland and transport them to Palestine. Take all the Jews from israel and transport them to Norn Iron. The Jews have experience of making somewhere with no economy prosper, sorted. The Unionists will be in the Promised Land, sorted. They will both get on with their neighbours WAY better, and iff'n they don't...come on, don't you want to see what happens when Paisley has to face down Hamas/Sharon has to face down McGuinness?

Beautiful.

read my post from a page back concerning my comparison of the conflict to the us if some things were to happen i think you would see the point of the palistenians quite well after that.

Likewise, Israel has happened.

It is time Palestinians and their backers realise that and get past it and work on getting a state for themselves (which is their inalienable right and I fully support).

It is the stubborn refusal of Palestinians to recognise Israel's right to exist (or rather the reality of Israel's existence) and the malicious intent of keeping the pot boiling by the various Arab "leaders" that is causing the vicious cycle to continue.

I agree, both sides must recognise both sides have a right to exist. If that doesn't happen, then the situation will continue to boil into madness.



Did not the UN partition the state and demarked areas for a Palestinian state?

Why did the Palestinians and their Arab backers reject the UN sanctioned partition?

They did and they didn't.

They did when the Israelis occupied all their lands illegaly.

They didn't when they were about to invade Israel.

Funny how these things work, eh?



Of course, let us all forget that the said princely state was invaded by Pakistan first. ;)

And remember that we do not agree that muslims need a seperate state. We accept the creation of Pakistan, but we do not agree with the reason behind the creation of Pakistan. Hence, we hold NO obligation to Pakistan to give them anything, let alone a piece of land.

After said princely states leader was going to join India without consenting with the people ;)

But really, you may not agree with the reason for it to exist, but is a small area full of mountains and full of people if given the chance to vote on it would most likely vote to join Pakistan worth nuclear war? I mean, there's the fact that K2 is there(which probably has no importance what-so-ever) and the symbolic fact it's the only Indian province with a Muslim majority, but is it worth preventing a lasting peace between the peoples of the Indian subcontinet, who besides their religion are brothers?

I'm sure G-d has some sick hand in this........Israel means "Fought with G-d".

Well everyone is fighting over who's G-d is right now. -.-

Let's just let the Buddhists take over, at least they'll allow everyone to live in harmony, let the Jews and Christians go to their holy sites.

Plus Fung Shui all our houses. =D

IMO, a two state solution is the only thing that's got any justice to it at all.
The Palestinians should be given the Gaza strip AND the West Bank. The Israelis keep the rest, and get their settlers the hell out of there.

Seriously, those settlers look like a blatant case of provocation to me. Israel doesn't NEED to put them there: it insists on doing so out of some kind of idea of 'principles' or some such. Pull the settlers out, pull the military out, and stop shafting the Palestinians. With out constant low level warfare, the Palestinians should then be able to get their act together to the point where they can reign

IMO, a two state solution is the only thing that's got any justice to it at all.
The Palestinians should be given the Gaza strip AND the West Bank. The Israelis keep the rest, and get their settlers the hell out of there.

Seriously, those settlers look like a blatant case of provocation to me. Israel doesn't NEED to put them there: it insists on doing so out of some kind of idea of 'principles' or some such. Pull the settlers out, pull the military out, and stop shafting the Palestinians. With out constant low level warfare, the Palestinians should then be able to get their act together to the point where they can reign

Seems the Palestinians are trying to prove thats its a BAD idea to remove the settlers . :D

Both sides have done their part of murdering and I can't bring myself to support either one.

It would be nice if it was all merged into one federation of jewish and muslim people. No state religion. Just people living together. But yet that would find a lot of opposition from both sides.

I don't support Israel nor Palestine. Both of them have been widely abusive and aggressive.

It would be nice if it was all merged into one federation of jewish and muslim people. No state religion. Just people living together. But yet that would find a lot of opposition from both sides.

I don't support Israel nor Palestine. Both of them have been widely abusive and aggressive.
New Debate:

Israelstine or Palestael?

Ban guns and hide sharp objects in that country .. :D thats like GTA in riot mode with all the cheats on ..

New Debate:

Israelstine or Palestael?

LOL never thought about that...

It would be nice if it was all merged into one federation of jewish and muslim people. No state religion. Just people living together. But yet that would find a lot of opposition from both sides.

...
Yes, it would be perfect. Of course, it is unattainable now; unfortunately, it was already an unreachable goal in 1947.

israel is evil

but the palestinian government isn't much good

I suport the palestinien people

Here's an interesting view of Palestinians.

http://seconddraft.org/movies.php

I will support a democratic, sovereign state over terrorists any day of the week.

I will support a democratic, sovereign state over terrorists any day of the week.
Even if it started out as a terrorist one?
Remember History Yitzhak Shamir(first Isreal PM) was leader of the Stern gang that did bombings and assanation of Britsh officals if you don,t belive that then just ask Lord Moyne.
later the bodies of the terrorists were dug up in 1975 given a military funneral by Yitzhak Rabin(who was later killed by a Zionist Zealiot) the kind reserved for men of Distingused Valor then buried in MONT Herzl in an area reserved for the Nations eminet citizens.
so what do you mean terrorist over democrocy? Isreal started out as a Terroristic socity all the leaders for the most part when founded were considerd Terrorists by the Britsh Goverment at one time.
And you can have a terroristic Democrcy the U.S was one at one time we had elections corrupt as they were.. at the same time we were duing Manifest Destiney and killing all the Indians off and stealing there land.
so spare me the democrocy over Terrorism Speech.

I support for the most part Israel position. However I believe Palestinians need a state. With that said. Jordan/Egypt/Syria need to take there responsibilities in the Palestinian problem. I dont think the Israel should be the only ones giving up territory for a Palestinian state. Also I believe Jeruselem should be a city state. There official state religion being Jewish,Muslim and Christian in no particular order. Independent from Israel and Palestinian control.

Whereas the option of creating an independent 'Jerusalem' state sounds inviting, one must remember that Danzig/Gdansk, Berlin, et al. were also separated from their hinterlands by international fiat. If you add to the political difficulties engendered by such a plan the obvious cultural and religious differences, you will have a seething kettle for future trouble.

As much as I would like to say "a pox on both their houses," one must keep in mind that one is dealing with people. Jerusalem is a relatively large city that would not be where it is if it were not a force in the economy of the region. To divorce it from the surrounding territories just so that some religious people can feel that their religion 'owns' it would be a mistake. It would be far better to associate the city with one or the other political entity.

The intransigence of Israel, the Palestinians, and surrounding Arab states leaves me both angry and perplexed. A reality check is in order:

a) the descendants of the Palestinians driven from their homes in what is now Israel and left to survive in refugees camps in neighboring Arab states is a wrong that cries for redress.

b) the international community (we know who I mean) promised Jews and Kurds a homeland after world war 1; after world war 2, the Jews (and not the Kurds) who had suffered untold horrors at the hands of the Nazis and their allies gave a large part of Palestine to form a new Jewish state. The state of Israel, for whatever one may think of it, is a reality in that part of the world.

c) the attitude of the surrounding Arab states has been to threaten, to attack, and to be the conduit for terrorist activities against Israel rather than to work to alleviate the plight of the Palestinian refugees in their countries.

d) the world forgets that the victims of this situation have been men, women, and children from both sides: people whose 'crime' has been that they belonged to one or the other culture and were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It is now time for all sides to recognize that both sides have been and are guilty of crimes against the other, and to work for the future of both Israeli and Palestinian peoples.

NB: following world war 2, large portions of Germany were taken by neighboring states and German people whose ancestors had lived in those areas for centuries were expelled, often under inhumane conditions. If the German state can agree after the fact, for the good of their children and their neighbors' children, that the current frontiers are definitive, then the Israelis, Palestinians, neighboring Arab states should have the future safety and happiness of their citizens in mind and agree to solve this problem. The alternative would be a continuing human tragedy and a shameful rejection of what the Judeo-Christian-Islamic heritage is suppose to preach.

The intransigence of Israel, the Palestinians, and surrounding Arab states leaves me both angry and perplexed. A reality check is in order:

a) the descendants of the Palestinians driven from their homes in what is now Israel and left to survive in refugees camps in neighboring Arab states is a wrong that cries for redress.

b) the international community (we know who I mean) promised Jews and Kurds a homeland after world war 1; after world war 2, the Jews (and not the Kurds) who had suffered untold horrors at the hands of the Nazis and their allies gave a large part of Palestine to form a new Jewish state. The state of Israel, for whatever one may think of it, is a reality in that part of the world.

c) the attitude of the surrounding Arab states has been to threaten, to attack, and to be the conduit for terrorist activities against Israel rather than to work to alleviate the plight of the Palestinian refugees in their countries.

d) the world forgets that the victims of this situation have been men, women, and children from both sides: people whose 'crime' has been that they belonged to one or the other culture and were in the wrong place at the wrong time.

It is now time for all sides to recognize that both sides have been and are guilty of crimes against the other, and to work for the future of both Israeli and Palestinian peoples.

NB: following world war 2, large portions of Germany were taken by neighboring states and German people whose ancestors had lived in those areas for centuries were expelled, often under inhumane conditions. If the German state can agree after the fact, for the good of their children and their neighbors' children, that the current frontiers are definitive, then the Israelis, Palestinians, neighboring Arab states should have the future safety and happiness of their citizens in mind and agree to solve this problem. The alternative would be a continuing human tragedy and a shameful rejection of what the Judeo-Christian-Islamic heritage is suppose to preach.

If they were rational the problem would have been solved years ago .

I will support a democratic, sovereign state over terrorists any day of the week.

I have to agree with that. If I really had to choose between the two of them, I would obviously support Israel. At least they're a democracy.

Beer and Guns, Drunk commies deleted, Aryavartha, and The Lightning Star:

People keep telling me, "Israel exists, deal with it."

That doesn't satisfy me. Standing up for what's right means just that — not saying, "oh, well," and betraying yourself. Whether "Israel" ultimately wins this conflict or not, I would rather die knowing that, once I learned the truth, I never once gave the Zionists safe harbor in my mind, and that my struggle ended in my death, and not my surrender. Returning an insignificant portion of Palestine to the Arabs will NEVER be enough. What's theirs is theirs, and I want them to have it back. It's just too bad for the Jews that Zionists have ruined almost any chance of Jews being allowed in Palestine once that happens, for centuries at least.

Of course, if anyone could be trusted...you could always build another Palestine on heavy stilts. Just dig the Jewish stuff up and put it on the top bunk, and it's all cool! Use some of those light pipes, and everyone can even have sunlight! :D

Beer and Guns, Drunk commies deleted, Aryavartha, and The Lightning Star:

People keep telling me, "Israel exists, deal with it."

That doesn't satisfy me. Standing up for what's right means just that — not saying, "oh, well," and betraying yourself. Whether "Israel" ultimately wins this conflict or not, I would rather die knowing that, once I learned the truth, I never once gave the Zionists safe harbor in my mind, and that my struggle ended in my death, and not my surrender. Returning an insignificant portion of Palestine to the Arabs will NEVER be enough. What's theirs is theirs, and I want them to have it back. It's just too bad for the Jews that Zionists have ruined almost any chance of Jews being allowed in Palestine once that happens, for centuries at least.

Of course, if anyone could be trusted...you could always build another Palestine on heavy stilts. Just dig the Jewish stuff up and put it on the top bunk, and it's all cool! Use some of those light pipes, and everyone can even have sunlight! :D

I understand what yer sayin, but the total annihilation of Israel is pretty darn far off, if it ever occurs. What I think is that for now both sides should just accept what they got, and maybe in a few decades(or centuries) they'll eventually be unified.

And if we get a unified world government by then, we won't have to worry :D

I understand what yer sayin, but the total annihilation of Israel is pretty darn far off, if it ever occurs. What I think is that for now both sides should just accept what they got, and maybe in a few decades(or centuries) they'll eventually be unified.

And if we get a unified world government by then, we won't have to worry :D

yeah...it's tough for us terrorists to stay motivated sometimes :P

That doesn't satisfy me. Standing up for what's right means just that — not saying, "oh, well," and betraying yourself.

I don't see how not accepting the reality is gonna get them any close to their objectives.

Their tactics are taking them farther from their objectives (an independant homeland) than towards it.

What Palestine needs is a Gandhi who can turn the tables on the Israelis and unify the various factions behind an attainable objective by non-violent means.

I don't see how not accepting the reality is gonna get them any close to their objectives.

Their tactics are taking them farther from their objectives (an independant homeland) than towards it.

What Palestine needs is a Gandhi who can turn the tables on the Israelis and unify the various factions behind an attainable objective by non-violent means.

First, our realities seem to be different. In my reality, "Israel" doesn't exist, so it appears we have a fundamental disagreement here. Also, remember that the popular objective is to take back Palestine, not just Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem.

Second, It seems very unlikely to me that anyone, no matter how charismatic, could convince the soldiers not to rocket, snipe, and bomb the "Israelis" after so much time and so much oppression. It would take about two Gandhis to make me stop supporting them, and the closest I've ever been to Palestine is Belgium. :/

Third, what would be an "attainable objective?" And do you honestly think any normal (read: not divine) human being could convince the Palestinians to struggle for it non-violently?

I don't see how not accepting the reality is gonna get them any close to their objectives.

Their tactics are taking them farther from their objectives (an independant homeland) than towards it.

What Palestine needs is a Gandhi who can turn the tables on the Israelis and unify the various factions behind an attainable objective by non-violent means.

Yeah.

Unfortunatly, I think Hamas killed all the Gandhi's :(

And I don't think they need a Jinnah. The muslims already have their own land.

First, our realities seem to be different. In my reality, "Israel" doesn't exist, so it appears we have a fundamental disagreement here.
That's why your reality is false. That's why the Palestinians will get nowhere with their "We don't recognise Israel but somehow we will get the Palestinian state by blowing up ourselves".

Also, remember that the popular objective is to take back Palestine, not just Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem.
And how does not recognising Israel and shouting that "we're gonna kill all the joos and push them into the sea" gonna make the Palestinians achieve this popular objective?

Second, It seems very unlikely to me that anyone, no matter how charismatic, could convince the soldiers not to rocket, snipe, and bomb the "Israelis" after so much time and so much oppression.
Unlikely at this juncture, yes. But it was not all the time like that. Currently the situation has spiralled into a big vicious cycle of mistrust and violence.
Third, what would be an "attainable objective?" And do you honestly think any normal (read: not divine) human being could convince the Palestinians to struggle for it non-violently?
Attainable objective is a sovereign Palestine state of west bank and Gaza. Possibly east Jerusalem as a quasi-autonomous area or part of Palestine.

It is attainable. The Israelis are better than the colonial British administration.

Gandhi was a very normal person with very normal ideas. It only seems extra-ordinary because we have managed to convince ourselves that violence is justified and is the only option. It is not.

What about Mandela and MLK who were inspired by Gandhi and started non-violent movements and achieved their objectives?

An eye for an eye will leave the world blind
- Mohandas Gandhi.

First, our realities seem to be different. In my reality, "Israel" doesn't exist, so it appears we have a fundamental disagreement here. Also, remember that the popular objective is to take back Palestine, not just Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem.

Second, It seems very unlikely to me that anyone, no matter how charismatic, could convince the soldiers not to rocket, snipe, and bomb the "Israelis" after so much time and so much oppression. It would take about two Gandhis to make me stop supporting them, and the closest I've ever been to Palestine is Belgium. :/

Third, what would be an "attainable objective?" And do you honestly think any normal (read: not divine) human being could convince the Palestinians to struggle for it non-violently?

I am not being critical of the above post . In fact I think it illustrates the reallity of the situation almost perfectly . But take this point of view and the Israeli point of view and you have the very reason why it is almost impossible to solve the problem without major intervention by an outside power or powers...what basically helped to start the whole mess ...or just letting them butcher each other until one side is out of victims . Of course there is always the third option ..that the people , palestinians and Isreali will realise that this is the choice they have and find a compromise and settle things amognst themselves without mass graves. I wont bet on it because every time I get a little optimistic they start flinging rockets at each other . I would like to just put a big fence around the region and come back in a year to see whats left .
Thats how frustrating it is .

What about Mandela and MLK who were inspired by Gandhi and started non-violent movements and achieved their objectives?

- Mohandas Gandhi.Mandela is an Legendary Icon...Just like El Che.

Mandela is an Legendary Icon...Just like El Che.

You look past the fact that they used non- violence as a tool and a strategy to maximize their gains. They always had the option of the stick...or violence..that go's double for Mandela because he was working his non violence gig along with some very violent fellows who showed up as the alternative . Ghandi had only to hint at violence to scare the shit out of the British because of the multitudes of India and the very small amount of British to controll them . In some situations non - violence will get you lauaghed at and tortured and then shot . try that non- violence shit in Iraq when Saddam was in power . Try it in Syria today. north Korea...I could name a bunch of countrys .

Also I believe Jeruselem should be a city state. There official state religion being Jewish,Muslim and Christian in no particular order. Independent from Israel and Palestinian control.
The original UN partition called for Jerusalem and a few outlying areas to be an international zone, modeled on a few others that existed at the time. Both sides rejected it, wanting the city for themselves. Can't say as I blame them, but I do have a plan of my own. Have a very large international coalition (maybe around 400,000 troops or so) occupy the greater Israel area, dissolve the governments and have a temporary provisional government, and destroy any HAMAS or Fatah factions, as well as any Israeli militias that may inevitably pop up. Then we'll talk.

The original UN partition called for Jerusalem and a few outlying areas to be an international zone, modeled on a few others that existed at the time. Both sides rejected it, wanting the city for themselves. Can't say as I blame them, but I do have a plan of my own. Have a very large international coalition (maybe around 400,000 troops or so) occupy the greater Israel area, dissolve the governments and have a temporary provisional government, and destroy any HAMAS or Fatah factions, as well as any Israeli militias that may inevitably pop up. Then we'll talk.


Isreal has a large proffesional and battle hardened army and one of the best Air Forces in the world . They also have Nukes . You better bring alot of body bags for the force that tries to impose their will on that country .
400,000 is just an appetizer that would be decimated mostly in transit unless you could figure out how to pull a surprise ..In this day and age numbers only translates into more targets to kill .

Isreal has a large proffesional and battle hardened army and one of the best Air Forces in the world . They also have Nukes . You better bring alot of body bags for the force that tries to impose their will on that country .
400,000 is just an appetizer that would be decimated mostly in transit unless you could figure out how to pull a surprise ..In this day and age numbers only translates into more targets to kill .
That's the problem. But left to its own devices, the Israeli/Palestinian issue is a threat to global stability. I'm no military expert, and of course, no military expert will even care what I say. But I feel that diplomacy has failed, filled with a cycle of genuine hard work by outsiders, only to have Israeli appeasement, Palestinian aggression, then Israel realizing that they shouldn't have appeased, and running to the opposite extreme. This has been happening for decades, and gets more dangerous by the day. Israel needs to be saved with the rest of the world, and this is the best way to do it.

So we should just all band toghether ALL the Countrys in the world and tell Israel and Palestine " be good or we will shoot you " .
Israel and Palestine would be married and will have already had 5 children before you will unite the countrys in the world to that .

So we should just all band toghether ALL the Countrys in the world and tell Israel and Palestine " be good or we will shoot you"How about we just tell them..."be good or we will not give you anymore welfare...not one more cent."

So we should just all band toghether ALL the Countrys in the world and tell Israel and Palestine " be good or we will shoot you " .
Israel and Palestine would be married and will have already had 5 children before you will unite the countrys in the world to that .
Everyone can stay out of it for the time being, but when (and not if) they have to go there to prevent the inevitable global suicide, the job will be all the harder.

Isreal has a large proffesional and battle hardened army and one of the best Air Forces in the world . They also have Nukes . You better bring alot of body bags for the force that tries to impose their will on that country .
400,000 is just an appetizer that would be decimated mostly in transit unless you could figure out how to pull a surprise ..In this day and age numbers only translates into more targets to kill .

Imposing world will on one country is easy... in case of israel it's even easier. Any country in the world crumples to the power of embargo... the bigger and more capitalist it is, the faster it falls. israel isn't really in any position to fight an embargo (since they're literally surrounded by countries who would enforce the embargo to the fullest extent), and its people are quite consumerist. If EU were to declare a complete embargo I'd bet the surrounding nations would declare it also... consequence: israeli economy dies off in a matter of a couple months... no armies involved, no good guys dead.

Imposing world will on one country is easy... in case of israel it's even easier. Any country in the world crumples to the power of embargo... the bigger and more capitalist it is, the faster it falls. israel isn't really in any position to fight an embargo (since they're literally surrounded by countries who would enforce the embargo to the fullest extent), and its people are quite consumerist. If EU were to declare a complete embargo I'd bet the surrounding nations would declare it also... consequence: israeli economy dies off in a matter of a couple months... no armies involved, no good guys dead.
That will never happen, and I'll tell you why: the Palestinians would need to be cut off, too, which the Arabs would viciously oppose. Besides, Israel is part of the global supply chain and is critical to the world economy. It'd be best if a swift attack and occupation did as little to the Israeli economy as possible. That's not the enemy, anyhow. In fact, Israel is not the enemy. Israel is the friend that is committing suicide.

That will never happen, and I'll tell you why: the Palestinians would need to be cut off, too,

West bank could be supplied from Jordan, Gaza from Egypt.



Besides, Israel is part of the global supply chain and is critical to the world economy.

Not a major oil exporter, only minor weapons sales... it's not really that critical ;) Africa can take care of any fallouts, and they'd be happy for it.


It'd be best if a swift attack and occupation did as little to the Israeli economy as possible.

Read the point above ;)
After all... rebuilding economies is what brings companies like Halliburton profit :D but in order to rebuild, you gotta blow it up first *cough*serbia, iraq*cough*

That's not the enemy, anyhow. In fact, Israel is not the enemy. Israel is the friend that is committing suicide.

I prefer to have friends (*country wise, not people wise... I believe that israelis are ok, but the state of israel is not) which don't really, you know like... support state terror... or drop bombs on a house which kill 14 ppl, 9 of them children just to get 1 suspected terrorist.

*Edited for clarity

West bank could be supplied from Jordan, Gaza from Egypt.

Making it so hard.


Not a major oil exporter, only minor weapons sales... it's not really that critical ;) Africa can take care of any fallouts, and they'd be happy for it.
So, you're caught in the trap that the Middle East exports only oil and imports only weapons, which is true in most places, but not Israel. Israel has a great tech sector, is a leader in stem cell research, and is a hub for trading capital and diamonds (only Antwerp trades more diamonds then Tel Aviv). Part of what made Israel so rich is that they allowed innovation, unlike their Arab neighbors.

Actually I was referring to israel selling weapons, not buying them.

And their tech sector is already being slowed down... you know the scientists are actually enforcing an embargo, very rare universities in the world do joined researches with the israeli universities and research institutes (actually israelis have been complaining about that for the last year or so :p )

Trade goods can always be transported through other countries, it's a minor shift (2-3 days worth of trasport adjustments)... a company or two might die, but it would be for the greater good. Israel was never that important of a trade route, it lies in a rather "troubled area", and such places are never a popular place for goods transports.

And the diamonds... it would only make them more expensive, meaning africa and russia would earn more €... the only ones taking the shock would be the israeli.

I support an independant palestine/west bank, possibly with the eastern half under palestinian control and the west under israeli control, or some form of joint soverignty.

As far as i'm concerned, Israel is de facto occupying Palestine. To give an analogy, it would be like us Brits still keeping hold of the Republic of Ireland. (Since it only became independant in 1916, 1919 or 1922, depending which country you ask)

The occupation causing far more trouble than it's worth, and costing more than money. If the world can now recognise East Timor as a soverign state after 27 years of occupation - why not palestine?

I support Israel 100%. They have rights to that land. I hear the argument that the Pal. derserve that land 'cuz Israel stole it from them in 1948, however if one thinks about it israel was a nation some 2000 yrs ago... so that gives them rights...Also Those lands that the bastard Sharon gave up is rightfully Israel's through conquest of war..Just as the SW Us belongs to america through war....Finally The arabs don't want to have two seperate states...they won't be happy until Israel is completly destroyed.

PLO :gundge:
Hamas :gundge:
Islamic Jihad :gundge:
Israel :fluffle:

And what about ordinary Palestinian Arabs who want self rule? Conquest of war is not an acceptable in the 21st century. If China kicked the USA's arse through war, would annexing the USA under Maoist rule be acceptable?

And what about ordinary Palestinian Arabs who want self rule? Conquest of war is not an acceptable in the 21st century. If China kicked the USA's arse through war, would annexing the USA under Maoist rule be acceptable?

Further, if conquest of war is admissible, it cuts both ways — if "Israel" can conquer lands by war, then it has no place criticizing HAMAS or Hezbullah. Certainly, it could fight them, but to declare them terrorists would be to damn themselves.

Ok i see why someone created a thread thats almost exactly the same as this one . Your poll has more options and they only wanted either/ or ...or maybe there is another sinister and more insidious reason...bwahahahahaha ..will we ever know for sure ?

until we (america) stop giving israel money, im all for palestine
Do you know how much money America gives to the 'Palestinians'?
Or the Egyptians?
Or the Jordanians?
Or the Syrians?
Or the Lebanese?

And what about ordinary Palestinian Arabs who want self rule? Conquest of war is not an acceptable in the 21st century. If China kicked the USA's arse through war, would annexing the USA under Maoist rule be acceptable?
If China was the defending nation, meaning if the US attacked for no reason, then yes, they do have the right.

Just like how Israel captured the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights, and Sinai Penninsula in a defensive war against the belligerent fascist empires of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan.

I support an independant palestine/west bank, possibly with the eastern half under palestinian control and the west under israeli control, or some form of joint soverignty.

As far as i'm concerned, Israel is de facto occupying Palestine. To give an analogy, it would be like us Brits still keeping hold of the Republic of Ireland. (Since it only became independant in 1916, 1919 or 1922, depending which country you ask)

The occupation causing far more trouble than it's worth, and costing more than money. If the world can now recognise East Timor as a soverign state after 27 years of occupation - why not palestine?

Because, if 'Palestine' becomes an independent state, their government will have only one goal: Destroy Israel.

This will send the 'country' into more debt, more hate, and give their citizens even worse living conditions than they currently have. The 'Palestinians' are incapable of ruling themselves. They are zombies, with one common goal, 'Destroy the Jews, Destroy the West, Conquer the World'

Hmmm... What other organization had shared those goals?

Oh ya! The Nazis.

I'd also like to add a thought to this. You all say the Isralites are horrible, oppressive, fascists, eh?
Put any country in Israel's place, and give them an army equivelant to the IDF.
What does the West Bank, Gaza Strip, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan look like?
Nuclear Wasteland.

The Israelites are showing incredible restraint, especially under this barrage of hate, racism, and civilian slaughter.

Actually I was referring to israel selling weapons, not buying them.

And their tech sector is already being slowed down... you know the scientists are actually enforcing an embargo, very rare universities in the world do joined researches with the israeli universities and research institutes (actually israelis have been complaining about that for the last year or so :p )
Not true. All boycott moves have actually crumbled. Few universities in the world can afford to NOT cooperate with the country that produces half the world's biotech and a good chunk of the world's software and computer technologies.


And the diamonds... it would only make them more expensive, meaning africa and russia would earn more €... the only ones taking the shock would be the israeli.
And all the European and world stock markets and jewelry trade. Israel produces over 50% of the world's polished diamonds. The entire diamond industry worldwide would feel the impact.

Africa does not produce polished diamonds at all, they sell rough stones, so they would take a MAJOR blow if they lose the number one customer. Same with Russia, to a somewhat lesser extent. Perhaps Belgium and Australia would gain something- then again, they wouldn't get Israel's latest processing technologies- we have the most advanced diamond polishing factories in this Solar system.