NationStates Jolt Archive

Lately on the news no clear pictures have been drawn about Hezbollah. They fire rockets at Israeli citizens, they give money out to people who lose their homes, they have (supposebly) agreed to the cease fire, they are looking to wipe out the "Zionist mentality" and they gain support every day in Lebanon (most probably because Israel bombed the crap out of their homes). I'm a little confused here. Discuss?

Well its becuase, they ARE NOT all evil. They are devoted to lebanon and helping the lebanese people. But to them that also means killing Isrealis, civilians or military. The world just isnt black and white. There is no Good vs Evil anymore, if there ever was. Each side has its evils and its goods. and they fight becuase they have converging paths that do not coincide.

It's simple politics, taken to an extreme level.

They tap into the major emotions of arabs in the region. The Arab states oppose Israel, to such a high degree it makes you wonder if the oil is poisoning what drinking water they have access to. But the arabs are smart enough to know that taking on Israel will result in retaliation.

Hezbollah engulfs the problem readily. They first attack Israel, and hurt them in a way that Israel will feel. They make sure that the Israelis suffer pain for their crime, which is, in their minds, Israel's existence.

However, they also respond to criticism that would make a case for them being only a guerilla fighting group that cares only for destruction, inadvertently bringing that destruction upon their own. They assist in evacuating their own people, and when the Lebanese come back, they hand out money and assist in the reconstruction prjects. Thus, they minimize the impact of their actions on their own.

They agree to the cease-fire because the damage that they have done is done, and in a prolongued conflict, they would get hurt more during the earlier encounters than during the later ones. If they strike first, they do damage, then agree to a cease fire when it will protect them. They gain power because they are smart, and Lebanon is so politically fragmented that Hezbollah is the only effective operating organization in the area.

Hezbollah knows how to play its cards. It knows how to act, when to act, when to stop, how to recover, how to contain. Israel bumper stickers now claim for the removal of their ministers. Hezbollah has signs up in souther Lebanon that praise their leadership, signs that are, for the most part, respected by those that see them.

Hezbollah is a bunch of shitbags, but they're smart shitbags. Not only have they gotten credit for standing up to Israel--who didn't help matters any by fighting a proxy war for the US without any real clear goal (sound familiar?)--but they've been the people in southern Lebanon getting the rebuilding started while the Lebanese government is still discussing how they're going to do it. They're looking caring and proactive, and if you've just had your house bombed, that's all you care about--who's getting my house rebuilt. Very smart politics here.

Well its becuase, they ARE NOT all evil. They are devoted to lebanon and helping the lebanese people. But to them that also means killing Isrealis, civilians or military. The world just isnt black and white. There is no Good vs Evil anymore, if there ever was. Each side has its evils and its goods. and they fight becuase they have converging paths that do not coincide.
NOT evil, other than being genocidal ;)

Lately on the news no clear pictures have been drawn about Hezbollah. They fire rockets at Israeli citizens, they give money out to people who lose their homes, they have (supposebly) agreed to the cease fire, they are looking to wipe out the "Zionist mentality" and they gain support every day in Lebanon (most probably because Israel bombed the crap out of their homes). I'm a little confused here. Discuss?The news from what country? US? UK? Canada?.. I ask because the reports are not quite equal.

#1 Hezz fired rocket at Israel cities? Yes they did. Hezz killed civileans.
#2 Hezz help people? Yes they do.
#3 Hezz agreed to a Cease Fire? Yes of course.
#4 Hezz looking to kill all Jews? No, (Like the Palestineans) they want Israel to be created elsewhere. They want the Jews to go back to where they came from.
#5 Hezz gain support every day in Lebanon? Yes.. in Lebanon and around the World.

Hezb'allah was on a slow steady decline towards being considered obsolete until Olmert developed an attack of Bushitis and sent the IDF to bomb the shit out of everybody except Hezb'allah. That and the IDF pulling out without achieving much if any of their stated goals means Hezb'allah is back in demand and going to stick around for a few more decades.

Hezb'allah was on a slow steady decline towards being considered obsolete until Olmert developed an attack of Bushitis and sent the IDF to bomb the shit out of everybody except Hezb'allah. That and the IDF pulling out without achieving much if any of their stated goals means Hezb'allah is back in demand and going to stick around for a few more decades.BUt there's more to it than that. Ever since Israel pulled out the last time they occupied Lebanon, Hezbollah has been more than just a military presence. They've offered medical care and schools and built houses and neighborhoods. In short, they're winning the hearts and minds of the locals. It's not enough to just not be the enemy to do that--you have to offer some tangible benefit, and sadly, Hezbollah has done that.

BUt there's more to it than that. Ever since Israel pulled out the last time they occupied Lebanon, Hezbollah has been more than just a military presence. They've offered medical care and schools and built houses and neighborhoods. In short, they're winning the hearts and minds of the locals. It's not enough to just not be the enemy to do that--you have to offer some tangible benefit, and sadly, Hezbollah has done that.
And there's the problems Israel (and the US) face. They're not doing enough to win the hearts and minds of the locals, either in Lebannon/Gaza/West bank nor in Iraq.
They're too obsessed with a short-term fix solution, which invariably means pouring a lot of money into munitions then firing them as fast as possible at 'the enemy'.

Use that money to do as Hizbollah has done and in 10-20 years you wouldn't have an enemy: You'd have a population that has grown up dependent on you and fully aware of all the benefits and good you've done them.
Very few politicians can see that far, prefering to focus on the next election. Who wants to spend a fortune on a result 20 years hence when someone else will be taking the credit?
Also it'd be political suicide, especially in Israel. Just how long would a politician last if they advocated spending money helping Hizbollah supporters rather than buying guns to shoot them.

The news from what country? US? UK? Canada?.. I ask because the reports are not quite equal.

#1 Hezz fired rocket at Israel cities? Yes they did. Hezz killed civileans.
#2 Hezz help people? Yes they do.
#3 Hezz agreed to a Cease Fire? Yes of course.
#4 Hezz looking to kill all Jews? No, (Like the Palestineans) they want Israel to be created elsewhere. They want the Jews to go back to where they came from.
#5 Hezz gain support every day in Lebanon? Yes.. in Lebanon and around the World.

So the moral of the story dear children is to convert to Islam.

Well its becuase, they ARE NOT all evil. They are devoted to lebanon and helping the lebanese people. But to them that also means killing Isrealis, civilians or military. The world just isnt black and white. There is no Good vs Evil anymore, if there ever was. Each side has its evils and its goods. and they fight becuase they have converging paths that do not coincide.

Actually they are evil. They're dedicated to wiping out Jews. Don't believe me? Look up the bombing of the Jewish community center in Buenos Aires, Argentina. If they're only fighting Israel why are they killing Jews in Argentina?

The news from what country? US? UK? Canada?.. I ask because the reports are not quite equal.

#1 Hezz fired rocket at Israel cities? Yes they did. Hezz killed civileans.
#2 Hezz help people? Yes they do.
#3 Hezz agreed to a Cease Fire? Yes of course.
#4 Hezz looking to kill all Jews? No, (Like the Palestineans) they want Israel to be created elsewhere. They want the Jews to go back to where they came from.
#5 Hezz gain support every day in Lebanon? Yes.. in Lebanon and around the World.

You're a fucking liar. I've already presented you with evidence that Hez seeks to kill Jews wherever they are, not just in Israel and you keep spouting your bullshit. I'll keep calling you on it so nobody gets duped by your fucking lies.

Well its becuase, they ARE NOT all evil. They are devoted to lebanon and helping the lebanese people. But to them that also means killing Isrealis, civilians or military. The world just isnt black and white. There is no Good vs Evil anymore, if there ever was. Each side has its evils and its goods. and they fight becuase they have converging paths that do not coincide.

Hezbollah are much worse then that.

Hezz needs your funds!

Hezb'allah was on a slow steady decline towards being considered obsolete until Olmert developed an attack of Bushitis and sent the IDF to bomb the shit out of everybody except Hezb'allah. That and the IDF pulling out without achieving much if any of their stated goals means Hezb'allah is back in demand and going to stick around for a few more decades.


In fairness if it was full blown Bushitis he would have stopped after a few days of bombing and invaded the Aran Islands.

I do not believe it is black and white good and evil.

Anyone who blindly claims Israel over the last...since its creation is the innocent victim of evil muslim terror is fucking liar---a bigoted liar in all reality.

Hezzballah is not a person so I will not treat it as such---there are good and bad everywhere.

Anyone who claims to be completely right and having no fault--they are the ones to be frightened of.

As soon as anyone supports the terrorist organization hezbollah, they automaticly loose all respect. As they are obviously idiotic.

The news from what country? US? UK? Canada?.. I ask because the reports are not quite equal.

#1 Hezz fired rocket at Israel cities? Yes they did. Hezz killed civileans.
#2 Hezz help people? Yes they do.
#3 Hezz agreed to a Cease Fire? Yes of course.
#4 Hezz looking to kill all Jews? No, (Like the Palestineans) they want Israel to be created elsewhere. They want the Jews to go back to where they came from.
#5 Hezz gain support every day in Lebanon? Yes.. in Lebanon and around the World.

900,000 of the jews in Israel were refugees from arab contries -- expelled from those arab countries when Israel was formed. Do you really think Hezz wants them to go back to those countries? Or can we be honest and say that Hezz just wants them to do what all europeans expect jews to do -- be good boys and just die?

900,000 of the jews in Israel were refugees from arab contries -- expelled from those arab countries when Israel was formed. Do you really think Hezz wants them to go back to those countries? Or can we be honest and say that Hezz just wants them to do what all europeans expect jews to do -- be good boys and just die?

I can speak for a goodly number of Europeans and say that the end of your statement is in fact a load of bollocks. Please spare us your generalisations.

Hezbollah are a symptom of distress. They're a public force set up to do the dirty work of the people of Lebanon, similar to the roles Hamas and the IRA play for their respective people. A populace in fear and under threat has created an extremist armed force which has shot into popularity for its willingness to take some sort of decisive action on behalf of its support base, even where that action might create more problems in the long run.

I strongly disagree with its decisions on offensive action. However, it is a national militia, not a terrorist organisation. Attacking Lebanon to remove Hezbollah is like attacking Israel to remove the IDF; you are facing the very will of the people, not some rogue unit hiding behind civilians.

The way to combat Hezbollah as a force of hostility is through negotiation, neutral regulation and a period of Detente; not through strength of arms.

Hezbollah are a symptom of distress. They're a public force set up to do the dirty work of the people of Lebanon, similar to the roles Hamas and the IRA play for their respective people. A populace in fear and under threat has created an extremist armed force which has shot into popularity for its willingness to take some sort of decisive action on behalf of its support base, even where that action might create more problems in the long run.

I strongly disagree with its decisions on offensive action. However, it is a national militia, not a terrorist organisation. Attacking Lebanon to remove Hezbollah is like attacking Israel to remove the IDF; you are facing the very will of the people, not some rogue unit hiding behind civilians.

The way to combat Hezbollah as a force of hostility is through negotiation, neutral regulation and a period of Detente; not through strength of arms.Since when to national militias attack targets nearly half way around the world?

Since when to national militias attack targets nearly half way around the world?
Did Hezbollah attack targets half way around the world?

Did Hezbollah attack targets half way around the world?

Yep.

Yep.
That was supposed to be a request for more information!

That was supposed to be a request for more information!

I'm waiting for DCD to tell you. If he saw your reply that is. He posted about it once and provided a source about it.

Did Hezbollah attack targets half way around the world?

Buenos Aires, Argentina. Jewish community center and the Israeli embassy. One could almost consider the embassy a military target, but a community center? Plus they've placed cells in the USA that raise money for terrorism by commiting crimes.

Since when to national militias attack targets nearly half way around the world?

I didn't realize Lebanon and Israel were that far apart.

Buenos Aires, Argentina. Jewish community center and the Israeli embassy. One could almost consider the embassy a military target, but a community center? Plus they've placed cells in the USA that raise money for terrorism by commiting crimes.
I certainly condemn the attack, whoever did it. However, these attacks are the result of much speculation, with the primary suspects being Iran and Syria rather than Hezbollah or Lebanon. I suppose since they do accept support from Iran and Syria, they are at least complicit in the attack, and it's entirely possible that a Lebanese man was used to do it. I don't see any reason to assume that Hezbollah was collectively responsible though; especially since they denied responsibility for what seems to have been intended as a propaganda tool where other extremist movements, including the Syrian Islamic Jihadi, were more than willing to step up to the spotlight.

I certainly condemn the attack, whoever did it. However, these attacks are the result of much speculation, with the primary suspects being Iran and Syria rather than Hezbollah or Lebanon. I suppose since they do accept support from Iran and Syria, they are at least complicit in the attack, and it's entirely possible that a Lebanese man was used to do it. I don't see any reason to assume that Hezbollah was collectively responsible though; especially since they denied responsibility for what seems to have been intended as a propaganda tool where other extremist movements, including the Syrian Islamic Jihadi, were more than willing to step up to the spotlight.

Argentina’s General Prosecution issued an official announcement identifying a Lebanese national sent on behalf of the Hezbollah organization as the terrorist responsible for the suicide bombing attack at the AMIA Jewish community center (July 1994)http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/eng_n/argentina_e.htm

Also I can't find the link anymore but I had one earlier that said the Hez "martyr" has been immortalized with a statue in a Hez controlled Southern Lebanese town.

http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/eng_n/argentina_e.htm

Also I can't find the link anymore but I had one earlier that said the Hez "martyr" has been immortalized with a statue in a Hez controlled Southern Lebanese town.
While I don't exactly trust that source (what, with it being an Israeli Intelligence organisation), it seems as though I can find no recent sources (outside of Wikipedia) supposing that "Hezbollah did not do it". Some articles I have found are this one in About (http://judaism.about.com/library/2_history/bl_buenosaires_a.htm) and another one from the Middle East Forum (http://www.meib.org/articles/0003_s1.htm) which basically point out the inconsistencies in the story on Syria, where the authorities refused to suspect or arrest anyone where obvious links with Syrian operatives existed (not exactly a credible one), and this one dating back to 2005 (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Terrorism/argentina.html) where Israeli sources declare that Iran made use of Hezbollah's criminal operations in the Argentine area as a base from which to launch the attack. This one is pretty recent too, with basically the same accusation; Iran made the call and used Hezbollah's criminal operations in the region to launch the attack.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=273898&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0

I still see no obvious reason to assume that Hezbollah was any more than complicit in the attacks and purely criminal in its other operations. While the motivation is definitely there, the refusal of Hezbollah to take responsibility seems very odd for what would appear to be a clear attempt at intimidation, revenge and propaganda.

Lately on the news no clear pictures have been drawn about Hezbollah. They fire rockets at Israeli citizens, they give money out to people who lose their homes, they have (supposebly) agreed to the cease fire, they are looking to wipe out the "Zionist mentality" and they gain support every day in Lebanon (most probably because Israel bombed the crap out of their homes). I'm a little confused here. Discuss?
They're not all evil, but some are. Obviously I want the attacks on Israel to stop, but don't approve of their improper state-within-a-state. The LEbanese government is responsible for its people's welfare, not Hezbollah.

They're not all evil, but some are. Obviously I want the attacks on Israel to stop, but don't approve of their improper state-within-a-state. The LEbanese government is responsible for its people's welfare, not Hezbollah.
Yeah, but the fact is that when a central government is either unwilling or unable--more of the latter in this case--to provide basic services, someone is going to step in to fill the void. In this case, that's Hezbollah.

And there's the problems Israel (and the US) face. They're not doing enough to win the hearts and minds of the locals, either in Lebannon/Gaza/West bank nor in Iraq.
They're too obsessed with a short-term fix solution, which invariably means pouring a lot of money into munitions then firing them as fast as possible at 'the enemy'.

Use that money to do as Hizbollah has done and in 10-20 years you wouldn't have an enemy: You'd have a population that has grown up dependent on you and fully aware of all the benefits and good you've done them.
Very few politicians can see that far, prefering to focus on the next election. Who wants to spend a fortune on a result 20 years hence when someone else will be taking the credit?
Also it'd be political suicide, especially in Israel. Just how long would a politician last if they advocated spending money helping Hizbollah supporters rather than buying guns to shoot them.

There'd be an entire student union of Yigal Amirs waiting to meet the politician.

You're a fucking liar. I've already presented you with evidence that Hez seeks to kill Jews wherever they are, not just in Israel and you keep spouting your bullshit. I'll keep calling you on it so nobody gets duped by your fucking lies.You forgot to take your pill.. You are going bananas.. :D

But I have to admit.. you are entertaining when you go bananas. :p

So the moral of the story dear children is to convert to Islam.No.. I am NOT about to convert to Islam.. or any other religion.

The Moral of the story is: Do NOT artificially create a Jewish State in the Middle of the ArabLands.

No.. I am NOT about to convert to Islam.. or any other religion.

The Moral of the story is: Do NOT artificially create a Jewish State in the Middle of the ArabLands.

Since you like colors:

All Middle Eastern states were artificially created.

Since you like colors:

All Middle Eastern states were artificially created.

In away, all Human Divisions where artifically created.

What i dont understand is that if the world is supposed ot be such a democratic place, why the hell does a) Israel even exist. (a guilt trip by the West after WWII ? or the West moving the "jewish" problem away from their own borders?) Realising that since so much of the western European population had participated in the wholesale mass slaughter of people by ethnicity I am sure the Western leaders were worried about recriminations and guilt. Solution, Dump the people who have just been pummeled beyond belief into some insignificant( to the west) quarter of the world. Palestine.. Just before you start Hezbollah bashing for the racism Just recall the reason why that country exists is because the western Europeans are so intolerant, tat after having tried to exterminate a people, they then Exported them elsewhere. Now, when it comes to "wholesale destruction of Jews" that is not Hezbollah's main tenet or practice. There are extremists within extremists, I would be prepared to bet that there are MORE American White Supremacists who are willing to see the wholesale destruction of "Jews" as opposed to Israelis.

Hezbollah want the Jewish state of Israel off their doorstep, and out of their holy places. During the previous times when Jerusalem and other shrines to ALL religions, were being controlled by Muslim powers, Access was available to all. Things have changed from the pure meaning of such religious teaching on all sides.
and b) There are well over a billion Muslims int he world, easily the largest single religion, and you know what? Their democratic voice doesn't mean shit to the west. i would go so far that no-one outside the G8 has any real influence. ( no evidence just anecdotal)
Democracy in its representative form is pointless. Too many stupid people take part in the process, with no knowledge about whats really going on. If democracy really existed then the world balance wouldn't be as it is today.

Time again the Quran teaches Muslims, that Jewish and Christian people are our Brethren (people of the books) and the 30 years I have studied comparative religion just demonstrates the closeness between all religions. The belief in one true god, the belief in a higher power that governs the way you live. No religions been laid down as a war mongering murderer, thats just people. The problem is that there are few too many sheep and not enough shepherds.

Now we can intellectualise and discuss and debate, but if its your sister thats been shelled, your home thats been bulldozed, or your bar thats just been suicide bombed; (incidentally a grave sin in Islam, suicide and this whole martyrdom thing is a twisting of the actual texts of the Quran, Jihad is struggle against the temptation of Satan, which, ultimately imho if you give in to suicide bombing then you have lost your struggle with Satan,) its very hard to think clearly, then multiply that by generations, you start to understand what we are dealing with here. Islam tells its followers to seek knowledge even though it be in China. The idea that no-one can intercede between you and God in Judgment, is meant to stimulate scientific exploration and cultural awareness. Not to follow the most vicious orator, or Mullah.. Here you see the problem with the human condition, theres far too many easily influenced for want of a basic explanation, "Thick" people. If global averages were taken I think we would be shocked by the levels of intelligence.

Anyways, a couple of 2ps worth there.

No.. I am NOT about to convert to Islam.. or any other religion.

The Moral of the story is: Do NOT artificially create a Jewish State in the Middle of the ArabLands.

Yeah, but whinging about that isn't exactly going to make the terrorist problem go away, or bring about a Palestinian state, anyway. If we wanted to dish out blame and "I was here first" we'd be arguing back to the Ming Dynasty and handing Israel to the primordial soup.

Also, consider looking at a map of Europe and comparing it to the Middle East. Which looks really, really artificial and drawn up by British/French toffs with a ruler?

Yeah, but whinging about that isn't exactly going to make the terrorist problem go away, or bring about a Palestinian state, anyway. If we wanted to dish out blame and "I was here first" we'd be arguing back to the Ming Dynasty and handing Israel to the primordial soup.

Also, consider looking at a map of Europe and comparing it to the Middle East. Which looks really, really artificial and drawn up by British/French toffs with a ruler?

Why can't we have a one state solution? I mean arabs and jews have been living together in that region for well over two thousand years. They've only started to hate each other in the last 100 years.

During the crusades they fought side by side to defend their homeland from the invading franks. The same situation accord in spain. The jews and arabs were allies against the christen reconquest of spain. When spain fell, where do you think the jewish refugees fled to? france? england? nope. They went to the arab lands and the ottoman empire.

Last but not least, arabs and jews are actually a related people (hard to believe, huh) they are both descendents of two brothers. So they are both sematic people. I only wish that both sides could put their differences aside and remember the closeness they once shared. It is really simple, if people hate jews for being sematic then they must hate arabs for the same reason.

As they say, rivalry between relatives is the worst kind. Lets stop the hate.

#4 Hezz looking to kill all Jews? No, (Like the Palestineans) they want Israel to be created elsewhere. They want the Jews to go back to where they came from.

Wait, so why does the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (aka Hamas's Charter) say it is an obligation of all of the world's Muslims to kill Jews anywhere and everywhere they may be found?

In away, all Human Divisions where artifically created.
In a very real way. No Nation, Colony, Tribe or Community has any ownership, posession or territory that are not those of its members and creators.

Wait, so why does the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (aka Hamas's Charter) say it is an obligation of all of the world's Muslims to kill Jews anywhere and everywhere they may be found?

Because they're a bunch of bloodthirsty extremist bastards? Just a thought.

When they do say that, they go against their own scriptures. And yes, they do the same "tearing one verse out of context" thing that other conservative/violent religious groups do to justify their agendas.

Yeah, but the fact is that when a central government is either unwilling or unable--more of the latter in this case--to provide basic services, someone is going to step in to fill the void. In this case, that's Hezbollah.

Of course Hezbollah's charity wing was inevitable. But they're too powerful for a charity. The international community should support the Lebanese government to start taking more responsibility.

Hezbollah's influence is destabilising. It's good that they build houses but this leads people to support the military wing, which is detrimental to permanent peace.

No.. I am NOT about to convert to Islam.. or any other religion.

The Moral of the story is: Do NOT artificially create a Jewish State in the Middle of the ArabLands.
No one ethnic group has a right to hegemony over all that land, especially when you consider how small Israel is.

I also don't know how a non-native American can say this without hypocrisy.


As they say, rivalry between relatives is the worst kind. Lets stop the hate.
Excellent post. Racism is the worst thing in the world. Arabs and Jews can live together if they just remember that they all want peace and freedom, and they're all the children of Israel and Ismael.

dp

Since you like colors:

All Middle Eastern states were artificially created. I dont think so..

For example..
how was Egypt created?
how was Iraq created?
how was Iran created?
how was Saudi Arabia created?

maybe the Kuwait/UAE were articially created.. but at least they were created with the people in place... they did not have to bring boatloads of outsiders(jews) to create those countries.

Hezbollah is Iran's proxy. Their way of having a foot in the door and denying the complete occupation of muslim religio-political space to the sunni Arab regimes.

Despite their social programs and their legitimacy as a militia representing Lebanese shia interests, their taking directives from Iran, instead of the consent of the Lebanese shia and working for Iranian interests severely degrades their claims to moral superiority IMO.

Plus, all this death and destruction because they want people like Samir Kuntar released. If you know what Samir Kuntar did, you would be pretty disgusted..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samir_Kuntar

See, this is the problem. Same thing happen when we entered an arms trade deal with Iran. Weapons for prisoners, so what did Iran do, capture innocent Americans and trade them for Weapons.

Heres the plan, go into the cell, and execute him. Problem solved. Hezzbollah no longer has a person their trying to get, and another murderer is no longer a threat.

There has NEVER been peace in the Middle east. Since before the Romans, the middle east has been a place of bloodshed and contestation. the muslims invaded and took over the control of Jerusalem. Jews and muslims never fought side by side. They fought eachother. Jews fought on the Christian side because they would deliver them from Muslim rule, well then they got Christian rule. Before the seccond crusade, Jerusalem was a beacon of peace, but some people who wanted to destroy the Muslims, started a war which they lost. Thus Jerusalem fell to the Muslims again. In the Third Crusade, Richard the lion hearted Retook Jerusalem by executing people in the city as the muslims on the hill watched. Salaadin, in order to save lives agreed to an uneasy peace with the Christians. Then after World War II in order to prevent the hollocaust from happening again and yes because many people were antisemites, they decide to create their own Jewish state to get rid of them. Where did they put them? where they wanted to be. In the Jewish holy land of Israel, where they were long before the Muslims came. THeyre have been many wars to retake Israel yet Israel has won all of them and even increased its land mass. Spoils of war mate, its a beautiful thing.

See I would like to agree that this is a full democratic world. But i know it to be true that its not. We supply Israel with weapons, if we didnt? they would be whiped off the face of the Earth and all the People executed. The situation in Israel will never be resolved with out violence. I mean we've tried. Peace process after peace Process, and yet no return. Few months to years peace and then back to fighting. It wont be settled until one side wins. And personally im ruiting for the Israelis. Not that im Anti Islam, and im not, its just, Israel citizens arent targetting civilians, and killing little children.


See I would love peace in the Middle east, but first the Muslims must lay down their arms. If the Muslims lay down their arms first Israel will lay down its arms. If Israel lays down its arms first, they'll be a seccond Hollocaust.


And just a note Islam is not the worlds single largest religion, i put my 2.5 billion Christians against your 1.3 billion muslims.

I dont think so..

For example..
how was Egypt created?
how was Iraq created?
how was Iran created?
how was Saudi Arabia created?

maybe the Kuwait/UAE were articially created.. but at least they were created with the people in place... they did not have to bring boatloads of outsiders(jews) to create those countries.



How was egypt created?: warfare Iraq?: warfare, Iran? warfare Saudi Arabia? Warfare.


How was Israel created, Warfare, how was Kuwait Created? revolution with US help. so Warfare. All nations were created through blood.

How was Israel created.Israel was created at New York on november 29, 1947.

Israel was created at New York on november 29, 1947.

as a result of WWII

They should all be caught and executed.

I can speak for a goodly number of Europeans and say that the end of your statement is in fact a load of bollocks. Please spare us your generalisations.

Nope. I will not spare you the condemnation. Either you take the side of the
people of peace or I will assume that this just a continuation in Europe's centuries-old tradition of antisemitism.
They say that evil wins when the good people do nothing. Well, I have every reason to believe that the Europeans, in this case, choose to laugh with joy when the evil attacks. Why? Because when you see then sun come up every day you begin to expect it.

NOT evil, other than being genocidal ;)

Are they?

Time again the Quran teaches Muslims, that Jewish and Christian people are our Brethren (people of the books) and the 30 years I have studied comparative religion just demonstrates the closeness between all religions.
Anyways, a couple of 2ps worth there.

It doesn't matter what Quran says. When Muslims fight Christians, Jews, other Muslims, atheists, Buddists, Hindus (did I miss anyone?) all at the same time, you must admit that there is an underlying problem with their philosophy. My answer is Pride. With capital P. It is vain and empty it give every person a feeling of entitlement for what they don't own. It is what justifies and all the modern muslim confilicts.

The Moral of the story is: Do NOT artificially create a Jewish State in the Middle of the ArabLands.

Even if one were to think this has been a mistake, as there have been many mistakes in the past, does that imply it can justly be corrected by removing the State?

For, I do not consider it right to deport the Isreali's, simply because mistakes have been made in the past. The Arabs and Israeli's living in the area have to deal with the fact that the other lives there as well, and should find ways to live together...

----
In this bloody conflict peace comes from the Brave!

Nope. I will not spare you the condemnation. Either you take the side of the
people of peace or I will assume that this just a continuation in Europe's centuries-old tradition of antisemitism.
They say that evil wins when the good people do nothing. Well, I have every reason to believe that the Europeans, in this case, choose to laugh with joy when the evil attacks. Why? Because when you see then sun come up every day you begin to expect it.
Anti-semitism has been widespread in Europe, and is occasionally still a problem, but do you truly believe that a majority of Europeans is anti-semitic?

For, I believe it is currently a minority, and not seldom the same racist people as the Muslim bashers.

Then there is the anti-semitism of those simple minds that cannot seperate Israeli policies from Jews. However, I do not think that this form of ignorance is widespread either.

It doesn't matter what Quran says. When Muslims fight Christians, Jews, other Muslims, atheists, Buddists, Hindus (did I miss anyone?) all at the same time, you must admit that there is an underlying problem with their philosophy. My answer is Pride. With capital P. It is vain and empty it give every person a feeling of entitlement for what they don't own. It is what justifies and all the modern muslim confilicts.

Some Muslims have excessive pride, and so they attack people of all other faiths (and of no faith.) But all religions have a very proud contingent that considers itself chosen by divine will. Let's not forget that in most of the conflicts involving Muslims, both sides attack each other; neither side is the sole aggressor. Except for the battle against al-Qaeda, a group which consistently hits civilians both in the West and in the Middle East.

All people need to lose their pride. If that were to happen, there would be fewer conflicts. I'm not optimistic about the chances, though, because excessive pride is human nature. Not solely the nature of Muslims, or of Christians, but of people from every part of the world.

Are they?

Have you read Hamas's charter?

i believe the isrealies planned to attack lebanon right in the begginging. Lebanon is one of the most beautiful countries in the middle east. They were just out of a civil war and rebuilt their city for tourism. Israel is holding a grudge on Hezbollah because they are one of the biggest organizations against them.
It is not clear whether the captured Israeli soldiers were on lebanon soil but the Israelies took that excuse to attack because it is one of their oldest military quotas to "never leave a man behind". Seriously....it was just an excuse to weaken Hezbollah and bomb the shit out of all their resources and transportation. And who says that the two soldiers are even in Lebanon (or alive for that matter)? Hezzbollah streches to syria and iran and the leader cant possibly control all of them.
And its not only Israel that is not following the UN resolution; it says,
"Emphasising the need for an end of violence, but at the same time emphasising the need to adress urgently the causes that have given rise to the current crises, including by the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers"
Unconditionaly....without trading or negotiating....just release them. And wat are they doing now? Hezzbollah wants a prisoner that Israel has released in exchange for the two prisoners. Both parties breaking a resolution not even a month old.....wats the use of a resolution that nobody is following?
case closed.

i believe the isrealies planned to attack lebanon right in the begginging.

Substantiate this claim. Why would Israel have any interest in attacking Lebanon when it's already at war with someone else (the Palestinian authority)? There's no logical basis to claim that Israel intended to attack Lebanon from the start.

Israel is holding a grudge on Hezbollah because they are one of the biggest organizations against them.

I don't think I would like a group of people who wants me and 6 million of my people carted off to gas chambers very much either.

It is not clear whether the captured Israeli soldiers were on lebanon soil but the Israelies took that excuse to attack because it is one of their oldest military quotas to "never leave a man behind".

Apparently you're not reading facts. It's *very* clear they were on Israel's own soil. They were stationed some distance inside the border and they were on duty at the time. If they were in Lebanon, they would have been AWOL.

And who says that the two soldiers are even in Lebanon (or alive for that matter)? Hezzbollah streches to syria and iran and the leader cant possibly control all of them.

What's your point? The two soldiers are currently believed to be in enemy custody. That makes them MIA, but with a significant probability that they're alive.

Hezbollah wants to trade the soldiers for terrorists currently in Israeli jails. Hezbollah isn't stupid. Nasrallah realises that if he had the two soldiers killed, Hezbollah would not get what they want. So there's a high probability that the two soldiers are still alive.

Both parties breaking a resolution not even a month old.....wats the use of a resolution that nobody is following?

How is Israel breaking it, exactly?

Some Muslims have excessive pride, and so they attack people of all other faiths (and of no faith.) But all religions have a very proud contingent that considers itself chosen by divine will. Let's not forget that in most of the conflicts involving Muslims, both sides attack each other; neither side is the sole aggressor. Except for the battle against al-Qaeda, a group which consistently hits civilians both in the West and in the Middle East.

All people need to lose their pride. If that were to happen, there would be fewer conflicts. I'm not optimistic about the chances, though, because excessive pride is human nature. Not solely the nature of Muslims, or of Christians, but of people from every part of the world.

You know that is true, but consider this...

If you take a map of the world, and trace the boundary between geographic regions where each particular religion is dominant, you'll notice some interesting patterns.

In the Americas, the entire area is prediominantly Christian. Simple enough.

Moving on to Europe, most of Europe is Christian, on into northern Asia. As you stay in Northern Asia and start to reach Mongolia and China, you see Christianity bordering on Buddhism and a few others. No problem. Peaceful. Japan is a mix of Shinto and Christian. Peaceful.

Where Buddhism borders on Hindu, there is peace. sometimes there are political skirmishes, but overall it's quiet there.

Where Hinduism borders on Islam, there is conflict. India vs. Pakistan. In northern Afghanistan, pre-invasion, there ws conflict with Buddhism. As we move across southern Asia, we see war and conflict, even before invasion. As we bear north back up into Europe, there's Islam bordering on Christianity, and conflict. (heard of Sarajevo?) In the region of Palestine, Judaism borders on Islam on 3 sides. conflict all around.

South into Africa, Islam is dominant across the northern part of the continent, but as we move south it becomes Christian mixed with tribal beliefs. Conflict. (This goes largely unreported, and un-dealt with by the U.N. For years Christians h ave been forced off their farms and homesteads by Islamic squatters and the Governments encourage the practice.)

So EVERYWHERE that Islam encounters another religion, there is conflict. yet, where other religions encounter each other, there is peace.

Oh, and I j ust know somebody is going to use the Crusades as an example of Christian aggression. Before you do, read. Educate yourself. Before the Crusades began, Islam was spreading, BY FORCE up into southeastern Europe. The Crusades were a response to that.

Oh, and I j ust know somebody is going to use the Crusades as an example of Christian aggression. Before you do, read. Educate yourself. Before the Crusades began, Islam was spreading, BY FORCE up into southeastern Europe. The Crusades were a response to that.

Wait, so then why did they kill the Jews in the Crusades as well? Certainly they weren't "spreading by force".

Some Muslims have excessive pride, and so they attack people of all other faiths (and of no faith.) But all religions have a very proud contingent that considers itself chosen by divine will. Let's not forget that in most of the conflicts involving Muslims, both sides attack each other; neither side is the sole aggressor. Except for the battle against al-Qaeda, a group which consistently hits civilians both in the West and in the Middle East.

All people need to lose their pride. If that were to happen, there would be fewer conflicts. I'm not optimistic about the chances, though, because excessive pride is human nature. Not solely the nature of Muslims, or of Christians, but of people from every part of the world.

I wasn't talking about Pride as part of human nature. I was talking about Pride as inherent in the modern muslim culture. The biggest complaint if you really listen to muslims complain is the humiliation. That is just another word for pinched pride.

Anti-semitism has been widespread in Europe, and is occasionally still a problem, but do you truly believe that a majority of Europeans is anti-semitic?

For, I believe it is currently a minority, and not seldom the same racist people as the Muslim bashers.

Then there is the anti-semitism of those simple minds that cannot seperate Israeli policies from Jews. However, I do not think that this form of ignorance is widespread either.

I think the anti-semitism in Europe is something that Europeans take warm to heart. They've learned that they can't be openly antisemitic because that will get them dismissed from the ranks of sane people. But they do take joy in harm comming to jews. There is such a conecept as the spirit of a nation.
It is the invisible hand, the statistical average, of the tendencies of the said nation's citizens. And seeing how all modern European policies would choose tyrants (Baath and Ayatollahs) of the Middle East of the Democracy of Israel trying to not be killed, I think it is clear where the hearts of the Europeans lie.
Again, you see the Sun come up every day, you come to expect it. To prove that Europe all of a sudden stopped being anti-semitic you would have to show pretty compelling evidence. The age of reason or progress is NOT compelling enough evidence. European waves of open anti-semitism often followed progress. Jews were always Europeans' favorite scape goats. And with every wave of progress there are always those left behind and looking for someone to blame.

I think the anti-semitism in Europe is something that Europeans take warm to heart. They've learned that they can't be openly antisemitic because that will get them dismissed from the ranks of sane people. But they do take joy in harm comming to jews. There is such a conecept as the spirit of a nation.
It is the invisible hand, the statistical average, of the tendencies of the said nation's citizens. And seeing how all modern European policies would choose tyrants (Baath and Ayatollahs) of the Middle East of the Democracy of Israel trying to not be killed, I think it is clear where the hearts of the Europeans lie.
Again, you see the Sun come up every day, you come to expect it. To prove that Europe all of a sudden stopped being anti-semitic you would have to show pretty compelling evidence. The age of reason or progress is NOT compelling enough evidence. European waves of open anti-semitism often followed progress. Jews were always Europeans' favorite scape goats. And with every wave of progress there are always those left behind and looking for someone to blame.Your critique of those that supposedly support tyrants is not fair. I for one live in Europe, as you might have guessed. ;)
I am also critical of Israel, possibly more critical of Israel than the surrounding states. Why would I be, considering that Israel is Western style democracy?
Consider that there is another government I am highly critical of...

As you might have guessed it is my government. let me explain...

I for one, will be more, and not less critical of those that are close to me. I am critical of Israel because I am afraid that this democracy, which I do hold dear, is at risk of turning into a state of oppression. I do understand the position of the people of Israel, yet I consider prolonged conflict to be harmful to the liberal nature of its democracy, harmful for its young people struggling against an enemy that is being de-humanized. I perceive this to be a grave risk, therefore I am critical. Unconditional support may well do more harm than good.

I do encounter prejudice; however, it is seldom targeted at Jews. Surely, whenever I do find anti-Semitism I will oppose it, as I oppose all forms of prejudice. Nonetheless, you might be aware that Islam and Arabs are currently targeted far more often than Judaism these days. People speak of the Christian/Judean/Humanistic culture in Europe for a single reason, to argue that Islam is not part of Europe and never will be.

You must understand that not all criticism of Israel equals anti-Semitism; that we do not support these tyrants. Moreover, that the changing discourse versus Muslims, has an analogy in the changing discourse versus Jews during the first half of the 20th century in Europe. And that we should be wary of viewing minorities as a threat, lest the horrors of history repeat itself.
------
Peace is for the brave!

Oh, and I j ust know somebody is going to use the Crusades as an example of Christian aggression. Before you do, read. Educate yourself. Before the Crusades began, Islam was spreading, BY FORCE up into southeastern Europe. The Crusades were a response to that.
Concerning self-education….

From the beginning of the tenth century up until the twelfth century we can discern four major powers in the region, three of which were Muslim, namely the Fatimids in the Maghreb, the Abbasids in the Mašriq and the Umayyads in the Iberian Peninsula. The other mayor power in the region, the Byzantine Empire, encompassing contemporary Greece, large parts of contemporary Italy and Anatolia, was a Christian Empire. Given the importance of religion at the time, one might expect that conflict would predominantly arise between the Muslim powers and the Christian Power, yet this is not the case. The Fatimids for example had at many times remarkably cordial relations with Byzantine. For, the three Islamic Empires were each other’s main competitors, all claiming to be the sole commander of the faithful.

Moreover at the beginning of the first crusade these Empires were on the decline. The Fatimids who held the “holy land” had quite peaceful relations with the Byzantine Empire. The Crusades did not come from the Christian Byzantine Empire but from the West European nations, and did not help the Byzantine Empire. Moreover the new arrivals were considered to be barbarians by all parties, including Jews and Christians.

;)

Well its becuase, they ARE NOT all evil. They are devoted to lebanon and helping the lebanese people. But to them that also means killing Isrealis, civilians or military. The world just isnt black and white. There is no Good vs Evil anymore, if there ever was. Each side has its evils and its goods. and they fight becuase they have converging paths that do not coincide.

I disagree. Hezbollah are a collection of murderous fanatics who seek to destroy the Middle-East's most stable democracy because of a deep rooted racist urge which is at odds with the religioon they profess to belive in. Furthermore they are even less devoted to Lebanon than Israel. Israel pulled out of Lebanon six years ago. Hezbollah stayed, terrorising the people and oppressing all beneath them in their fiefdom. Israel has one of the world's most stringent sets of rules about reducing civilian casualties and has done its itmost to conduct its campaign with as little civilian bloodshed as possible. However Hezbollah have done the opposite. They have gone beneath human shield tactics. They don't use civilians to protect their buildings so they don't get bombed.....they put their installations so that when Israel strikes as many civilians are killed as possible. They use civilians for MEDIA COVERAGE!!! How can anyone side with these people against Isreal which, for all its problems like racism and stealing of the West bank, is a fairly alright country.

[QUOTE=Politeia utopia;11612200]Concerning self-education….

From the beginning of the tenth century up until the twelfth century we can discern four major powers in the region, three of which were Muslim, namely the Fatimids in the Maghreb, the Abbasids in the Mašriq and the Umayyads in the Iberian Peninsula. The other mayor power in the region, the Byzantine Empire, encompassing contemporary Greece, large parts of contemporary Italy and Anatolia, was a Christian Empire. Given the importance of religion at the time, one might expect that conflict would predominantly arise between the Muslim powers and the Christian Power, yet this is not the case. The Fatimids for example had at many times remarkably cordial relations with Byzantine. For, the three Islamic Empires were each other’s main competitors, all claiming to be the sole commander of the faithful.

Moreover at the beginning of the first crusade these Empires were on the decline. The Fatimids who held the “holy land” had quite peaceful relations with the Byzantine Empire. The Crusades did not come from the Christian Byzantine Empire but from the West European nations, and did not help the Byzantine Empire. Moreover the new arrivals were considered to be barbarians by all parties, including Jews and Christians.

;)[/QUOTE
True but the muslims in the area started the crusades by violating the treaties which guaranteed the safe passage of Christian pilgrims. Besides Jerusalem is Christianity's most holy city whereas it's Islam's #3. I mean cummon, let's be reasonable they didn't go for the Muslim #1 (except for that crazy French guy who ended up converting). And finally being annoyed about the Crusades from a religion which spread itself at the point of a sword, destroying christianity in North Africa and Southern Spain

Am I that uninteresting that I elicit no response?

True but the muslims in the area started the crusades by violating the treaties which guaranteed the safe passage of Christian pilgrims. Besides Jerusalem is Christianity's most holy city whereas it's Islam's #3. I mean cummon, let's be reasonable we didn't go for your #1. And finally being annoyed about the Crusades from a religion which spread itself at the point of a sword, destroying christianity in North Africa and Southern Spain
I am not willing to discuss the wrongs and rights of the crusades or the Islamic expansion, that would be pointless… :)

I am talking of a more precise view of History and current affairs.

The pilgrims you refer to were not allowed free access during the reign of al-Hakim. He was quite an exceptional figure, very unlike other Islamic rulers: He banned a molochia, a thick soup, because he did not like it. He forced women to remain indoors. He forced Christians and Jews to convert to Islam, and burned a church. Before the end of his reign however, he reversed his former policies. Women were free to travel again, the church was rebuilt, and the new Muslim “converts” were allowed to revert to their former religion. One day al-Hakim simply disappeared in the hills; he was most likely murdered.

This was the only occasion of maltreatment of Christians. Half a decade later the Pope (was it a Leo?) used this to incite Western Europe to start the Crusades.

Am I that uninteresting that I elicit no response?

No ;)

I think the anti-semitism in Europe is something that Europeans take warm to heart. They've learned that they can't be openly antisemitic because that will get them dismissed from the ranks of sane people. But they do take joy in harm comming to jews. There is such a conecept as the spirit of a nation.
It is the invisible hand, the statistical average, of the tendencies of the said nation's citizens. And seeing how all modern European policies would choose tyrants (Baath and Ayatollahs) of the Middle East of the Democracy of Israel trying to not be killed, I think it is clear where the hearts of the Europeans lie.
Again, you see the Sun come up every day, you come to expect it. To prove that Europe all of a sudden stopped being anti-semitic you would have to show pretty compelling evidence. The age of reason or progress is NOT compelling enough evidence. European waves of open anti-semitism often followed progress. Jews were always Europeans' favorite scape goats. And with every wave of progress there are always those left behind and looking for someone to blame.


Come on.
The Israeli government is behaving like assholes, never respecting its neighbouring nation's borders. The situation in Israel concerning its arab inhabitants is best desribed as apartheid. Oh, and there's Palestine...

The fact some Europeans are able to see this and criticize Israel's actions and the sionists does not in any way whatsoever make them antisemitic. To call them that is just trying to win a loosing argument by whining about past unjusticies.

Concerning self-education….

From the beginning of the tenth century up until the twelfth century we can discern four major powers in the region, three of which were Muslim, namely the Fatimids in the Maghreb, the Abbasids in the Mašriq and the Umayyads in the Iberian Peninsula. The other mayor power in the region, the Byzantine Empire, encompassing contemporary Greece, large parts of contemporary Italy and Anatolia, was a Christian Empire. Given the importance of religion at the time, one might expect that conflict would predominantly arise between the Muslim powers and the Christian Power, yet this is not the case. The Fatimids for example had at many times remarkably cordial relations with Byzantine. For, the three Islamic Empires were each other’s main competitors, all claiming to be the sole commander of the faithful.

Moreover at the beginning of the first crusade these Empires were on the decline. The Fatimids who held the “holy land” had quite peaceful relations with the Byzantine Empire. The Crusades did not come from the Christian Byzantine Empire but from the West European nations, and did not help the Byzantine Empire. Moreover the new arrivals were considered to be barbarians by all parties, including Jews and Christians.

;)


Yes, you are quite right. I only brought up the Crusades because almost invariably whenever someone complains about the aggressiveness of Islamic Fundamentalism, someone tries to defend it by pointing out the Crusades as an example of Christian aggressiveness.

But I agree 100% with what you point out about history. Ironically, at least one Crusade (The first, I believe) attacked Constantiople directly on the way to the Holy Land...

Wait, so then why did they kill the Jews in the Crusades as well? Certainly they weren't "spreading by force".

No, sadly the Jewish communities that had the misfortune of being in the path of the Crusaders were sacked as well. This was an example of the underlying anti-semitism "justified" by religious zealotry.

But that's beside the point. I only brought it up to... well read my post below.

Come on.
The Israeli government is behaving like assholes, never respecting its neighbouring nation's borders. The situation in Israel concerning its arab inhabitants is best desribed as apartheid. Oh, and there's Palestine...

The fact some Europeans are able to see this and criticize Israel's actions and the sionists does not in any way whatsoever make them antisemitic. To call them that is just trying to win a loosing argument by whining about past unjusticies.

I find that first line so hilarious I nearly wet myself. Are you serious? Are you really really honestly serious?

You do understand that the moment Israel was incorporated it was invaded, yes? And as a result of the Israeli counterattack they acquired a whole bunch of land from their attackers, yes? Are you also aware that they GAVE most of that land back? (No, they didn't have to. They gained territory in war, the most universally accepted method for expanding nations.) What they have now beyond Israel proper is a few pieces of land occupied in accordance with treaty.

Terrorists are constantly slipping into Israel to make trouble and you say it's Israel that doesn't respect boundaries. That's just laughable.

I find that first line so hilarious I nearly wet myself. Are you serious? Are you really really honestly serious?

You do understand that the moment Israel was incorporated it was invaded, yes? And as a result of the Israeli counterattack they acquired a whole bunch of land from their attackers, yes? Are you also aware that they GAVE most of that land back? (No, they didn't have to. They gained territory in war, the most universally accepted method for expanding nations.) What they have now beyond Israel proper is a few pieces of land occupied in accordance with treaty.

Terrorists are constantly slipping into Israel to make trouble and you say it's Israel that doesn't respect boundaries. That's just laughable.

You are right about the other post, but then you go and paint a rosy picture of Israel that is not much better... I think you know this... ;)

The Israeli government is behaving like assholes, never respecting its neighbouring nation's borders.

Israel has not once initiated an attack on another country. Every single war Israel has been in since its establishment has been defensive.

The situation in Israel concerning its arab inhabitants is best desribed as apartheid.

Arab Israelis have all of the same rights as Jewish Israelis. They vote, they run for the government, they are protected under anti-discrimination laws. Does discrimination against Arabs occur in Israel? Absolutely. However, it is not widespread and when it does occur Arab Israelis have access to the court system to defend their rights.

12 of the 120 members of the K'nesset are Arabs, if you didn't know.

Oh, and there's Palestine...

The Palestinian Territories aren't considered part of Israel for any legal purposes. Their citizens are governed by the Palestinian Authority, not the Israeli government.

The fact some Europeans are able to see this and criticize Israel's actions and the sionists does not in any way whatsoever make them antisemitic.

It's a fairly common claim by some that Zionism is a form of racism. Agreeing with this mantra is Anti-Semitic simply because essentially all Jews who identify with their people are Zionists. If you have a problem with Zionism, you have a problem with the Jewish people and should just come out and say that instead of trying to cloak it under the guise of something else.

Those that believe Israel is all bad, or all good can only prolong the conflict.
Same goes for the other side…

Go ahead, make statements that are not true to win an argument, score some points... *sigh*

-----
It is dangerous to take the middle road, for one is hit by traffic from both sides.

I must be a lemming…..

Those that believe Israel is all bad, or all good can only prolong the conflict.

Israel is not all good. There are plenty of problems within the country that need addressing, the way the war with Lebanon was handled among them.

I try to be as fair as possible, but when I see something like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion being accepted as a valid and credible source by the "Anti-Zionists", warning lights go off. When I see the claim being made that Muslims around the world should kill all of the Jews wherever they may be found, more of such lights go off.

When someone hates the Jews and wants them all to die, somehow I have trouble trusting what that person says.

You forgot to take your pill.. You are going bananas.. :D

But I have to admit.. you are entertaining when you go bananas. :p

Why don't you respond to the fact that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization with a history of killing Jews as far away as Buenos Aires? You conveniently ignore that fact no matter how often it's presented so you can continue to sing the hez's praises while shitting on Israel. You're an antisemitic, lying coward who can't even muster the balls to show his true antisemitic colors.

Israel is not all good. There are plenty of problems within the country that need addressing, the way the war with Lebanon was handled among them.

I try to be as fair as possible, but when I see something like the Protocols of the Elders of Zion being accepted as a valid and credible source by the "Anti-Zionists", warning lights go off. When I see the claim being made that Muslims around the world should kill all of the Jews wherever they may be found, more of such lights go off.

When someone hates the Jews and wants them all to die, somehow I have trouble trusting what that person says.
We should fight anti-Semitism, but remain open to valid criticisms of Israel, because it is criticism that strengthens democracy.

We should fight anti-Semitism, but remain open to valid criticisms of Israel, because it is criticism that strengthens democracy.

Legitimate criticism of Israel is acceptable. I'm no fan of the way the Olmert government handled this summer. I absolutely think that the Olmert government should have consulted the Lebanese government before invading. It's not Anti-Semitic to disagree with things the Israeli government has done or is doing.

Sadly, a lot of 'criticism of Israel' is really just people denying Israel's right to exist, which is Anti-Semitic.

"Semitic" isn't a synonym for jew, you know.

"Semitic" isn't a synonym for jew, you know.

The word 'Anti-Semitism' means hatred of the Jewish people, you know.

Come on.
The Israeli government is behaving like assholes, never respecting its neighbouring nation's borders. The situation in Israel concerning its arab inhabitants is best desribed as apartheid. Oh, and there's Palestine...

The fact some Europeans are able to see this and criticize Israel's actions and the sionists does not in any way whatsoever make them antisemitic. To call them that is just trying to win a loosing argument by whining about past unjusticies.

Not at all. Israel has always erred on the side of caution when it comes to military actions. For God's sake, they didn't even bomb Iraq after Iraq send Scuds their way. Any other nation in Israel's place would have used nukes already. The only reason they are blamed for the actions that are as limited as their is because of the anti-semitism. The only reason they are held to a lower standard of what it takes to an "ass hole", as you put it, is because they are jews. Noone else in the world would take this much shit and not go nuts.

Come on.
The Israeli government is behaving like assholes, never respecting its neighbouring nation's borders. The situation in Israel concerning its arab inhabitants is best desribed as apartheid. Oh, and there's Palestine...

The fact some Europeans are able to see this and criticize Israel's actions and the sionists does not in any way whatsoever make them antisemitic. To call them that is just trying to win a loosing argument by whining about past unjusticies.

Just re-read this nonsense. Did you say Israeli Arabs lived under apartheid?
Are you joking? I've been to Israel. Israeli Arabs have all the rights of Israeli citizens -- go to school, own businesses, vote, have access to the courts, etc. I had glasses made in a town that you wouldn't expect to be anything but a normal Israelie town. Not until we started speaking about who knows which languages did I realize that the optometrist was Arab. Arab woman no less! Can you imagine her having this kind of career in Jordan? I am not even going to mention Saudi Arabia or Iran. You think she lives in Aparteid? She doesn't. Nor do majority of Haifa University students (arabs). Nor do arab government employees in Israel. Israel actually has an affirmative action--type program where they would hire arab workers for government jobs over jewish just because they want not to oppress the minority. Aparteid? Really?

I find that first line so hilarious I nearly wet myself. Are you serious? Are you really really honestly serious?

You do understand that the moment Israel was incorporated it was invaded, yes? And as a result of the Israeli counterattack they acquired a whole bunch of land from their attackers, yes? Are you also aware that they GAVE most of that land back? (No, they didn't have to. They gained territory in war, the most universally accepted method for expanding nations.) What they have now beyond Israel proper is a few pieces of land occupied in accordance with treaty.

Terrorists are constantly slipping into Israel to make trouble and you say it's Israel that doesn't respect boundaries. That's just laughable.

To your amusment I can assure you that I'm perfectly serious.
I do understand that the moment Israel was created it was invaded. And to be honest, I'm not that surprised. I wonder what USA would do if UN suddenly decided to make a sovereign state for all persecuted gypsies out of Utah, without asking USA first, and enforce it's decision with absurd ammounts of firepower, expropriating the propertieis of former people of Utah.

Nevermind that, though, the fact still is that when Israel was created it was decided it should be 55 % of what was then to be Palestine. All of Jerusalem was not intended to be Israelian. Israel pretty much doubled its area since then. Very deliberatly, at that. It's not like they make a secret about that the taking of the whole of Palestine and Jerusalem is a holy mission, intended by God. Ever hear of such a thing as settlers, perchance?

The word 'Anti-Semitism' means hatred of the Jewish people, you know.the Word Anti-Semitism means hatred for Semites.

the proper word you are looking for is "Jew-Hater" or "Anti-Jews"

Jewish = Religion
Semite = Race.

There is millions of Non-Semite Jews.. Just ask Atlantic_Islands

Israel has not once initiated an attack on another country. Every single war Israel has been in since its establishment has been defensive.

I wouldn't say that. Both invasions of Lebanon makes Israel look like the aggressor in my eyes, and as for the six-days-war (I don't know what it's called in english, so I've just translated from swedish. Hope it makes sense.) Israel responded to egyptian troop movements and blockage of the Aqaba bay with an air raid. Maybe they didn't start it, but they weren't really innocent lambs.


Arab Israelis have all of the same rights as Jewish Israelis. They vote, they run for the government, they are protected under anti-discrimination laws. Does discrimination against Arabs occur in Israel? Absolutely. However, it is not widespread and when it does occur Arab Israelis have access to the court system to defend their rights.

12 of the 120 members of the K'nesset are Arabs, if you didn't know.

As for the rights of arabs in Israel I recommend The other side of Israel by Susan Nathan. She is herself jewish but decided to live in Tamra, an arab town in Israel. She has written about the systematic discrimination of arabs in Israel very much better than I possibly can.

The Palestinian Territories aren't considered part of Israel for any legal purposes. Their citizens are governed by the Palestinian Authority, not the Israeli government.

So? Israel still isn't being very nice about the whole situation, to say the least. Israel bloody kidnapped the palestine government.

It's a fairly common claim by some that Zionism is a form of racism. Agreeing with this mantra is Anti-Semitic simply because essentially all Jews who identify with their people are Zionists. If you have a problem with Zionism, you have a problem with the Jewish people and should just come out and say that instead of trying to cloak it under the guise of something else.

I don't claim that zionism is a form of racism. I claim that it's a very unlucky combination of to dangerous things, namely nationalism and fanatic religiousness. All jews who identify with their people are NOT zionists. That's a ridiculous claim. Many jews are much opposed to zionism. I find it hard to believe that they're anti-semitic.

Why don't you respond to the fact that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization.That is not a Fact.. That is only your opinion.

"Thats not a knife..." :D

http://www.ggf-gaming.de/images/crocodile_dundee_view.jpg

Not at all. Israel has always erred on the side of caution when it comes to military actions. For God's sake, they didn't even bomb Iraq after Iraq send Scuds their way. Any other nation in Israel's place would have used nukes already. The only reason they are blamed for the actions that are as limited as their is because of the anti-semitism. The only reason they are held to a lower standard of what it takes to an "ass hole", as you put it, is because they are jews. Noone else in the world would take this much shit and not go nuts.

Please see above answers, so I don't have to repeat myself too much.

The non-nuking could also have someting to do with that they would themself be hurt by it. Iraq is pretty much their own turf.
And you really really don't nuke people. Regardless. Unless you have no respect for civilians whatsoever. I don't think even Israel could do that.

And could you please stop implying that I'm anti-semitic? I've plenty of jews in my family, and my great love was jewish. I'm very much not anti-semitic.

That is not a Fact.. That is only your opinion.
lol

http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/Assets/ferrouscranus.jpg = you

I wonder what USA would do if UN suddenly decided to make a sovereign state for all persecuted gypsies out of Utah, without asking USA first, and enforce it's decision with absurd ammounts of firepower, expropriating the propertieis of former people of Utah.

That's not a valid analogy because it says you don't know how the State of Israel was formed. The Zionists legally purchased the land they lived in from the land's Ottoman owners. Is it illegal for Jews to buy land now? Is it illegal to sell land to Jews?

All of Jerusalem was not intended to be Israelian.

Actually, if you recall, the UN Partition Plan gave Jerusalem to the Arabs and the Zionists accepted that plan. The Arabs said no, they wanted all of it.

the proper word you are looking for is "Jew-Hater" or "Anti-Jews"

The American Heritage Dictionary seems to disagree with you.

an·ti-Sem·i·tism (n.)
1. Hostility toward or prejudice against Jews or Judaism.
2. Discrimination against Jews.

Jewish = Religion
Semite = Race.

'Jewish' refers to a person being a member of the Jewish people, regardless of whether he or she practices the Jewish religion (called Judaism).

There is millions of Non-Semite Jews.. Just ask Atlantic_Islands

A Semite may not be a Jew, but the term 'Anti-Semitism' has a specific definition pertaining to Jews. You may want to change the definition of the word to mince semantics, but as it turns out you're still incorrect anyway.


I wouldn't say that. Both invasions of Lebanon makes Israel look like the aggressor in my eyes, and as for the six-days-war (I don't know what it's called in english, so I've just translated from swedish. Hope it makes sense.) Israel responded to egyptian troop movements and blockage of the Aqaba bay with an air raid. Maybe they didn't start it, but they weren't really innocent lambs.

Israel's an aggressor because Hezbollah decided to go across the border, attack and kill several of its soldiers and abduct two others? You seem to indicate you are Swedish. If Norwegian terrorists mobilized across the border, attacked and killed some of your country's soldiers and abducted others, would you be happy letting them die or would you want the government do something?

Are you expecting Israel to ignore terrorists killing its citizens?

As for the rights of arabs in Israel I recommend The other side of Israel by Susan Nathan. She is herself jewish but decided to live in Tamra, an arab town in Israel. She has written about the systematic discrimination of arabs in Israel very much better than I possibly can.

Does discrimination exist in Israel? I do believe I said yes, it does. There is discrimination in any multicultural society. That is why it is necessary for the government to fight discrimination when it occurs, something Israel does. The fact that you're ignoring that fact when it's convenient says that you don't care what Israel does, you're just fishing for a reason to bash Israel and the Jews.

So? Israel still isn't being very nice about the whole situation, to say the least. Israel bloody kidnapped the palestine government.

The Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (aka the Charter of Hamas) says that it is the duty of every Muslim everywhere in the world to kill any Jew he or she may encounter and terminate the lives of every Jew on the face of this Earth.

Frankly, when people with such stated policies send people across the border to attack, kill and kidnap Jews, I'm not inclined to trust them very much, are you?

Would you be comfortable negotiating with people who believe that you should be terminated immediately without compromise or discussion simply by virtue of your religion?

Many jews are much opposed to zionism.

If less than 5% of the total Jewish people counts as 'many' then sure. The other 95% of the Jewish people does support Israel's right to exist.

The Jewish Reconstructionist Federation, Union for Reform Judaism, the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism and the Orthodox Union all have explicit policies of Zionism. That's EVERY SINGLE MOVEMENT of Judaism. Non-religious Jews have the same opinions simply because it's the most rational and obvious approach. Moreover, many have relatives that live in Israel that Palestinian terrorists would be all too happy to genocide off the face of this earth if they were able to.

Somehow, it doesn't strike me as surprising that most Jews support Israel. The alternative is to support people who want all Jews to die.

So you're either supporting the people who want you alive or the people who want you dead. Barring masochists, the choice is obvious.

How was egypt created?: warfare Iraq?: warfare, Iran? warfare Saudi Arabia? Warfare.


How was Israel created, Warfare, how was Kuwait Created? revolution with US help. so Warfare. All nations were created through blood.

Egypt:Umm...no? Egypt has existed for thousands of years in various forms at one point including modern Sudan and much of the Levant. It was here before the city of Rome was founded, let alone the Roman Empire. It is speculated that Egypt launched an invasion of Crete/Greece in the days of the Pharoh though it has never been fully proven(Just shows how far Egypts reach once was).

Iraq: No again? Not created by warfare, drawn up by the Brits as it was kind of a British mandate.

Saudi Arabia: Not positive on its history so no comment.

Israel: Warfare, and the West feeling guilty for its treatment of Jews/cleaning their hands of the Jewish "Problem". Especially the Brits who went thru a lot of shit during their mandate of Palestine.(I suggest you look up the Irgun and the Stern Gang for starters, not sure what the name of the Palestinian counterpart was.)

Kuwait: What the hell are you talking about?? Kuwait has been around since before WW1 as a British protectorate, back when us Americans were still digging for gold and fighting Pancho Villa. Learn some history before you post.

Please see above answers, so I don't have to repeat myself too much.

The non-nuking could also have someting to do with that they would themself be hurt by it. Iraq is pretty much their own turf.
And you really really don't nuke people. Regardless. Unless you have no respect for civilians whatsoever. I don't think even Israel could do that.

And could you please stop implying that I'm anti-semitic? I've plenty of jews in my family, and my great love was jewish. I'm very much not anti-semitic.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Fallout_G%26D77.JPG
for 2MT explosion fallout. The area of signifcant radiation damage stops
short of a 100 miles. This is much further than Israel is from Iraq. So, yes,
if they thought it was morally acceptable, they could have nuked Iraq.
No country ever had or ever should have respect for civilian lives of their attackers. Period. Unprovoked attack gives the defender moral right to level
their attacker into glass. Anyone who disagrees is advocating perpetual
limited war.

I am not implying that you are anti-semitic. I am saying it outright. You
are anti-semitic. I am going to offer proof of this. Your response speaks
for itself. "Not even Israel"... bit clearly indicates that you say that Israel
has no regard for civilian lives. Yet, I've demonstrated time and again that
no army in the world has more regard for civilian lives than Israel. It is a
contry under a constant state of attack. Yet they have managed to kill less
people than even police forces around the world kill under the level of violence that they are faced with. US killed 1000 panamanians just hunting for Noriega in '92. It also leveled building in Panama while doing so. Israel managed to kill just as few people while under the 2nd most severe
attack in its history. Why does this make you anti-semitic? Because
you hold Israel to a different standard than any other country. If any
other country did what Israel does, you would say that it is unfortunate
that it is happending, but that is how war is. Yet you blame Israel for
doing what it does while defending itself. Do you know what is the
most imoral thing in a war? Loosing! Do you know why? Because those who
loose are the ones who get punished the most. And since we do live under the laws of nature, those who get punished under the laws of nature are the
ones who behaved imoraly.
Your whole bit about having friends and lovers who were jewish is of course
nonsense. I've met jews who were anti-semitic. Anti-semitism is not disagreeing with jews or even wishing them all of them harm. Anti-
semitism is claiming that jews must be treated as if they have more responsibilities and obligations. It is claiming that jews have somehow misbehaved and must be punished when they don't live up to the the standards that are higher than the ones everyone else sets up for themselves.

That's not a valid analogy because it says you don't know how the State of Israel was formed. The Zionists legally purchased the land they lived in from the land's Ottoman owners. Is it illegal for Jews to buy land now? Is it illegal to sell land to Jews?.

They bought roughly 7% of what is now Israel. The problem is the expulsion of the Palestinians and the 1967 occupation and settlements.

I find that first line so hilarious I nearly wet myself. Are you serious? Are you really really honestly serious?

You do understand that the moment Israel was incorporated it was invaded, yes? And as a result of the Israeli counterattack they acquired a whole bunch of land from their attackers, yes? Are you also aware that they GAVE most of that land back? (No, they didn't have to. They gained territory in war, the most universally accepted method for expanding nations.) What they have now beyond Israel proper is a few pieces of land occupied in accordance with treaty.


I'm sorry but there is no basis in fact for that statement.

"Resolution 242 of 22 November 1967

The Security Council,

Expressing its continuing concern with the grave situation in the Middle East,

Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area can live in security,

Emphasizing further that all Member States in their acceptance of the Charter of the United Nations have undertaken a commitment to act in accordance with Article 2 of the Charter,

Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both of the following principles:
Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
Affirms further the necessity
For guaranteeing freedom of navigation through international waterways in the area;
For achieving a just settlement of the refugee problem;
For guaranteeing the territorial inviolability and political independence of every State in the area, through measures, including the establishment of demilitarized zones;
Requests the Secretary-General to designate a Special Representative to proceed to the Middle East to establish and maintain contacts with the States concerned in order to promote agreement and assist efforts to achieve a peaceful and accepted settlement in accordance with the provisions and principles in this resolution;
Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the progress of the efforts of the Special Representative as soon as possible. "

I think you can see what standing your theory "They gained territory in war, the most universally accepted method for expanding nations" has without me putting it in bold for you.

I'm sorry but there is no basis in fact for that statement.

I think you can see what standing your theory "They gained territory in war, the most universally accepted method for expanding nations" has without me putting it in bold for you.

There's no UN basis in fact for "gained territory in war, the most universally accepted method for expanding nations", you're exactly right. But with all due respect, gaining territory through war has been an established fact, and perfectly acceptable, for 1000s of years. It's a sign of world humanitarianism that it isn't any longer.

But it's also a sign of great moderation that the Israelis, in a defensive war, gave so much territory they had won back to their attackers - it's nearly without precedent, and certainly very atypical.

There's no UN basis in fact for "gained territory in war, the most universally accepted method for expanding nations", you're exactly right. But with all due respect, gaining territory through war has been an established fact, and perfectly acceptable, for 1000s of years. It's a sign of world humanitarianism that it isn't any longer.

But it's also a sign of great moderation that the Israelis, in a defensive war, gave so much territory they had won back to their attackers - it's nearly without precedent, and certainly very atypical.

Territory crammed with not very welcoming populations. Were this over deserted countryside, I wouldnt particularily give a flying fuck, tbh. However there are people evicted to make way for these settlements, and who are on the receiving end of the occupation. There is a recognised state of Israel, and that was gained in the manner you refer to. Enough however, is enough.

That's not a valid analogy because it says you don't know how the State of Israel was formed. The Zionists legally purchased the land they lived in from the land's Ottoman owners. Is it illegal for Jews to buy land now? Is it illegal to sell land to Jews?

Actually, if you recall, the UN Partition Plan gave Jerusalem to the Arabs and the Zionists accepted that plan. The Arabs said no, they wanted all of it.

Israel's an aggressor because Hezbollah decided to go across the border, attack and kill several of its soldiers and abduct two others? You seem to indicate you are Swedish. If Norwegian terrorists mobilized across the border, attacked and killed some of your country's soldiers and abducted others, would you be happy letting them die or would you want the government do something?

Are you expecting Israel to ignore terrorists killing its citizens?


Purchased land from the Ottoman's- Ottomans were run out of Palestine by the Palestineans who were promised independence for helping Britain in WW1(they were betrayed)-the number of Jews who owned land in Palestine were a minority.

You may try characterize Hezzbolah as terrorists engaged in terror war, they see themselves as continuing a war that was begun in 1948, the capture of Israeli soldiers in their view is a legit military act.

Israel ignore terrorist killing it's citizens-Israel has it's own terrorist history now that it has the backing of the USA it can hypocritically take a moral high road.

Purchased land from the Ottoman's- Ottomans were run out of Palestine by the Palestineans who were promised independence for helping Britain in WW1(they were betrayed)-the number of Jews who owned land in Palestine were a minority.

You may try characterize Hezzbolah as terrorists engaged in terror war, they see themselves as continuing a war that was begun in 1948, the capture of Israeli soldiers in their view is a legit military act.

Israel ignore terrorist killing it's citizens-Israel has it's own terrorist history now that it has the backing of the USA it can hypocritically take a moral high road.

So you support hezbollah leaders stating that they want all Jews to move to Isreal because it would be easier to kill them?

You consider that a "legitimate military act"?

Israel has it's own extremists so it should be no surprise when it gets the same in return.

Let me know if this was legitimate military action or ethnic cleasnsing/terroism
It concerns the recent leader of Israel no less.

"In August of 1953 Sharon, commanded the notorious 101 unit of IDF terrorists, in an attack on the refugee camp of El-Bureig, south of Gaza, where (according to an Israeli history of the 101 unit) 50 refugees were massacred. Other sources allege about 20.

In October of 1953, Sharon commanded the notorious 101 unit of IDF terrorists, in an attack on the Jordanian village of Qibya. Israeli historian Avi Shlaim describes the massacre thus: "Sharon's orders were to penetrate Qibya, blow up houses and inflict heavy casualties on its inhabitants. The village had been reduced to rubble: forty-five houses had been blown up, and sixty-nine civilians, two thirds of them women and children, had been killed".

Israel's foreign minister at the time, Moshe Sharett said "this stain (Qibya) will stick to us and will not be washed away for many years to come".

Between Feb. 28, 1955 and Oct. 10, 1956, Sharon led a paratrooper brigade in similar cross-border invasions of Gaza, Egypt, and the West Bank, Jordan. In the West Bank village of Qalqilya, Sharon's death squad killed 83 people.

In the Gaza Strip, 1967. Sharon brought in bulldozers and flattening whole streets. He did the whole lot, almost in one day. "

Israel has it's own extremists so it should be no surprise when it gets the same in return.

Let me know if this was legitimate military action or ethnic cleasnsing/terroism
It concerns the recent leader of Israel no less.

"In August of 1953 Sharon, commanded the notorious 101 unit of IDF terrorists, in an attack on the refugee camp of El-Bureig, south of Gaza, where (according to an Israeli history of the 101 unit) 50 refugees were massacred. Other sources allege about 20.

In October of 1953, Sharon commanded the notorious 101 unit of IDF terrorists, in an attack on the Jordanian village of Qibya. Israeli historian Avi Shlaim describes the massacre thus: "Sharon's orders were to penetrate Qibya, blow up houses and inflict heavy casualties on its inhabitants. The village had been reduced to rubble: forty-five houses had been blown up, and sixty-nine civilians, two thirds of them women and children, had been killed".

Israel's foreign minister at the time, Moshe Sharett said "this stain (Qibya) will stick to us and will not be washed away for many years to come".

Between Feb. 28, 1955 and Oct. 10, 1956, Sharon led a paratrooper brigade in similar cross-border invasions of Gaza, Egypt, and the West Bank, Jordan. In the West Bank village of Qalqilya, Sharon's death squad killed 83 people.

In the Gaza Strip, 1967. Sharon brought in bulldozers and flattening whole streets. He did the whole lot, almost in one day. "

Now try actually sourcing your cutnpastes. You do realize Sharon is no longer the leader of Isreal right? You do realize that Nasrallah has called for the extermination of all Jews worldwide, right?

Israel has it's own extremists so it should be no surprise when it gets the same in return.

Let me know if this was legitimate military action or ethnic cleasnsing/terroism
It concerns the recent leader of Israel no less.

"In August of 1953 Sharon, commanded the notorious 101 unit of IDF terrorists, in an attack on the refugee camp of El-Bureig, south of Gaza, where (according to an Israeli history of the 101 unit) 50 refugees were massacred. Other sources allege about 20.

In October of 1953, Sharon commanded the notorious 101 unit of IDF terrorists, in an attack on the Jordanian village of Qibya. Israeli historian Avi Shlaim describes the massacre thus: "Sharon's orders were to penetrate Qibya, blow up houses and inflict heavy casualties on its inhabitants. The village had been reduced to rubble: forty-five houses had been blown up, and sixty-nine civilians, two thirds of them women and children, had been killed".

Israel's foreign minister at the time, Moshe Sharett said "this stain (Qibya) will stick to us and will not be washed away for many years to come".

Between Feb. 28, 1955 and Oct. 10, 1956, Sharon led a paratrooper brigade in similar cross-border invasions of Gaza, Egypt, and the West Bank, Jordan. In the West Bank village of Qalqilya, Sharon's death squad killed 83 people.

In the Gaza Strip, 1967. Sharon brought in bulldozers and flattening whole streets. He did the whole lot, almost in one day. "


I suggest you read up on the Stern gang and the Irgun, they brought terrorism to the Middle East, it wasn't the Arabs. The Arabs just brought it to a new level with the suicide bomber.

Funny how during the 40's the exact thing that sparked this recent conflict, the Hezbollah capture of two Israeli soldiers, happened all the time, except it was British soldiers taken by the Jews, and in MOST cases they didn't come back whole. Their are recorded instances of British and Palestinian hostages being hanged, shot and even castrated.

Not that it makes Hezbollah inoccent, cause they aren't close to being inoccent. It is a terrorist group, but Israel has terrorism in its roots as well so don't take the moral high ground if you are pro-Israeli, cause Israel has no right to. It was Israeli's(actually Jews cause Israel wasn't a state at the time) who first used the letter bomb on British embassies.

So you support hezbollah leaders stating that they want all Jews to move to Isreal because it would be easier to kill them?

You consider that a "legitimate military act"?

I call a cross border raid targetting military forces, and the taking of two SOLDIERS a legitimate military act.

I call Hezbollah stating what you said disgusting.

I call a cross border raid targetting military forces, and the taking of two SOLDIERS a legitimate military act.

I call Hezbollah stating what you said disgusting.

It's in violation of the Geneva conventions to capture soldiers for the express purpose of using them as hostages and bartering pieces.

Not a "legitimate military act".

It's in violation of the Geneva conventions to capture soldiers for the express purpose of using them as hostages and bartering pieces.

Not a "legitimate military act".


I'm sure America and Israel have never ever done something like that :rolleyes:

Its also illegal to shoot fireworks on the 4th of July in your backyard...or to drive 26 MPH in a 25 MPH zone.


If you wanted to get that technical you could find every nation, every human being on this planet of being guilty of breaking some law. Whether it was right or wrong to do, those soldiers were legitimate military targets. They put on the uniform.

Menachem Begin-terrorist-blown up the British headquarters in the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, killing 91 people—Britons, Arabs and Jews—and injured many more.

Stern Gang. This was the terrorist group that had assassinated Lord Moyne, the British military governor in Egypt in 1944. One of the leading lights of the Stern Group was Yitzhak Shamir who became prime minister in 1983.

a case of the pot calling the kettle black

I'm sure America and Israel have never ever done something like that :rolleyes:

Its also illegal to shoot fireworks on the 4th of July in your backyard...or to drive 26 MPH in a 25 MPH zone.


If you wanted to get that technical you could find every nation, every human being on this planet of being guilty of breaking some law. Whether it was right or wrong to do, those soldiers were legitimate military targets. They put on the uniform.

So because one group alledgedly does it, it's ok for everyone else? Are you saying that countries/organizations/people shouldn't be held to the rule of law because some people break it?

In other words, it's alright to point the finger and say "You can't say anything because the US is doing it to"?

Menachem Begin-terrorist-blown up the British headquarters in the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, killing 91 people—Britons, Arabs and Jews—and injured many more.

Stern Gang. This was the terrorist group that had assassinated Lord Moyne, the British military governor in Egypt in 1944. One of the leading lights of the Stern Group was Yitzhak Shamir who became prime minister in 1983.

a case of the pot calling the kettle black

Have either of these called for the worldwide extermination of Muslims? Do these acts justify the continued violations by Hezbollah/Hamas/ Jihad/etc. when even their own gov'ts are calling for them to stop?

It's in violation of the Geneva conventions to capture soldiers for the express purpose of using them as hostages and bartering pieces.

Not a "legitimate military act". since when has Israel worried about the Geneva Convention, eeew the Irony! Geneva Convention also says it is illegal to annex land by force of arms, I could on but I'd need a to write a book to cover all Israel's GC violations.

since when has Israel worried about the Geneva Convention, eeew the Irony! Geneva Convention also says it is illegal to annex land by force of arms, I could on but I'd need a to write a book to cover all Israel's GC violations.


So you are arguing that it's alright for one side to violate it if the other is? Or are you just presenting nice little red herrings for the group?

Can you source that the GC say it's illegal to annex lands by force of arms? Do you deny that they signed a treaty returning them but it was rejected by Hamas?

Do you deny that both Hamas and Hezbollah have called for the extermination of all Jews?

Have either of these called for the worldwide extermination of Muslims? Do these acts justify the continued violations by Hezbollah/Hamas/ Jihad/etc. when even their own gov'ts are calling for them to stop?it's a horrible situation but Israel is resposible for much of it's own problems. If Israel wasn't a sectarian aparthied state it wouldn't have the problems it now has. You can't expect a people to be dispossed from their homes and land and walk away without a fight.

So because one group alledgedly does it, it's ok for everyone else? Are you saying that countries/organizations/people shouldn't be held to the rule of law because some people break it?

In other words, it's alright to point the finger and say "You can't say anything because the US is doing it to"?

NO, but it also is not alrite to point the finger at somebody when you are guilty of the same thing, unless you are a hypocrite.

it's a horrible situation but Israel is resposible for much of it's own problems. If Israel wasn't a sectarian aparthied state it wouldn't have the problems it now has. You can't expect a people to be dispossed from their homes and land and walk away without a fight.

Umm...that was a pretty biased post without much basis, I have to give Kecibukia that. Israel isn't an Apartheid state, not even close.

it's a horrible situation but Israel is resposible for much of it's own problems. If Israel wasn't a sectarian aparthied state it wouldn't have the problems it now has. You can't expect a people to be dispossed from their homes and land and walk away without a fight.

Right. Translation: I can't support my accusations so I resort to general bashing instead and ignore all questions.

NO, but it also is not alrite to point the finger at somebody when you are guilty of the same thing, unless you are a hypocrite.

I'm not guilty of anything. I recognize the problems that the US has as well as Isreal. I also don't condone the illegal actions of others because "they did it too".

So you are arguing that it's alright for one side to violate it if the other is? Or are you just presenting nice little red herrings for the group?

Can you source that the GC say it's illegal to annex lands by force of arms? Do you deny that they signed a treaty returning them but it was rejected by Hamas?

Do you deny that both Hamas and Hezbollah have called for the extermination of all Jews?

don't be lazy and look up the CG yourself, trust me annexation of lands by force is illegal.

Hamas-I've also heard they are willing to have a two state solution

Hezbollah-never heard talk of extermination-even if they did it's all rhetoric anyways-people say all sorts of stupid things in politics-GWB is good example

Umm...that was a pretty biased post without much basis, I have to give Kecibukia that. Israel isn't an Apartheid state, not even close.

anytime a state has different laws for different ethnic groups it becomes an aparthied state. Muslims in Israel do not have the same rights as Jewish Israeli's.

don't be lazy and look up the CG yourself, trust me annexation of lands by force is illegal.

So, unsupported facts. Gotcha

Hamas-I've also heard they are willing to have a two state solution

Source it.

Hezbollah-never heard talk of extermination-even if they did it's all rhetoric anyways-people say all sorts of stupid things in politics-GWB is good example

Nice red herring.

(e.g. “if they [Jews] all gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of going after them worldwide”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Nasrallah

anytime a state has different laws for different ethnic groups it becomes an aparthied state. Muslims in Israel do not have the same rights as Jewish Israeli's.

So Muslim or Christian Isreali citizens have different laws? Prove it.

So Muslim or Christian Isreali citizens have different laws? Prove it. here you go

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-genocide-palestinian-apartheidlaws.html#anchor20227

here you go

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-genocide-palestinian-apartheidlaws.html#anchor20227
Jewwatch is an anti-Semitic site which accepts The Protocools as a valid source.
The subtitles on the page include:
Jewish Genocides Today and Yesterday
Jewish Assassins
Jewish Slavery Industry
Zionist Occupied Countries
Jewish Religions (LOL! Includes Judaism, Atheism, Christianity, Millennialism, and Magic/Wiccan Cults)
Jewish Holocaust (the section devoted to denying the Holocaust)
Jewish Mind Control Mechanisms (the list here is "Judaism, Marxism, Communism, Liberalism, Civil Rights, Genocide Via Immigration, Anarchism, Freudianism, Millennium, Atheism, Feminism, Homosexuality, The New Left (1960-Present), Jewish IQ, Eugenics, Zionism, Judeo-Christianity / Zionist-Christianity"
And so much more....

So, unsupported facts. Gotcha
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Nasrallah

funny!!! to lazy to do an easy search on the Geneva Convention which will prove me corrrect or don't want to admit you're wrong, which is it.

If I supply you with a source then you will say it's a lie.

You lead a blinkered life of denial.:rolleyes:

Jewwatch is an anti-Semitic site which accepts The Protocools as a valid source. try be a little more mature. when ever someone critizes Israeli policy it's automatically anti-semitic. One of the articles was written by an Israeli Jew in an Israeli Newspaper and I've seen interviews with Israeli Jews in documentarys that confirm the same, are they anti-semitic too?

same tired arguement, if you aren't on our side you're a nazi jew hater

Did you not read the rest of my post?
...

funny!!! to lazy to do an easy search on the Geneva Convention which will prove me corrrect or don't want to admit you're wrong, which is it.

If I supply you with a source then you will say it's a lie.

You lead a blinkered life of denial.:rolleyes:

What "sources"? A site called "jewwatch" that accepts the protocols as a valid reference? Why don't you site stormfront next.

You've been making lots of claims. You haven't backed up a single one. If you're so sure, provide the source in the conventions. You've made the claim, the onus is on you to prove it.

Did you not read the rest of my post?
...

He won't bother, he'll just ignore what he can't answer and throw a bunch of red herrings into the pond.

Hamas-I've also heard they are willing to have a two state solution

Read the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance and you'll see why Hamas generally isn't liked by Jews or Israel. Pay particular attention to the part where it says that it is a religious obligation (ie a commandment) for Muslims to kill the Jews.

anytime a state has different laws for different ethnic groups it becomes an aparthied state. Muslims in Israel do not have the same rights as Jewish Israeli's.

Muslim Israelis have the same rights as Jewish Israelis. To claim otherwise is to deny the facts because they are inconvenient.

Muslim Palestinians (like Christian and Jewish Palestinians) are not citizens of Israel and are therefore are not entitled to any privileges associated with being a citizen of that country. The Palestianian Authority has authority over them. If Palestinians need more rights, the PA should be who you're complaining to, not Israel.

here you go

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-genocide-palestinian-apartheidlaws.html#anchor20227

JewWatch is not considered a valid source because it relies solely on lies and heresay rather than on facts and evidence. To rely on JewWatch as the basis for an opinion is to at best be horribly misinformed and at worst to commit deliberate academic fraud.

The site makes many other nonsensical claims which I won't bother to enumerate.

If you want to understand what the Jews believe in, logic holds you should ask Jews. If you want to understand Zionism, talk to Zionists. People who are opposed to a particular idea have something to gain by demonising it. Therefore, it is imperative on the individual to attempt to understand all relevant views on a particular subject in order to make up one's mind.

If you only listen to one set of views on a particular subject, you're not really thinking. Rather, you're simply being an idiot.

For Zionism, against Zionism... I don't care what side of the issue a person chooses to take as long as he or she is intelligent about it and can rationally defend it. An argument could certainly be made that Zionism is bad for what it is and for the effects it has had on people. That said, however, such an argument must be made based on what Zionism is and its history, not on Anti-Semitic nonsense arguments based not in fact but simple hatred of the Jewish people.

Read the Covenant of the Islamic Resistance and you'll see why Hamas generally isn't liked by Jews or Israel. Pay particular attention to the part where it says that it is a religious obligation (ie a commandment) for Muslims to kill the Jews.
I understand why many do not like Hamas. However, does this not mean that there are no better ways to deal with Hamas.

Hamas is a broad organisation that has gotten the support of the (gaza) people, Israel will consequently have to deal with Hamas. Hamas has shown some willingness to come to an agreement with Israel and I consider it a mistake to isolate Hamas.

Muslim Israelis have the same rights as Jewish Israelis. To claim otherwise is to deny the facts because they are inconvenient.
It is problematic that Arab Israeli’s have lesser access to public works than Jewish Israeli’s. This cannot be beneficial to Israeli society.

Muslim Palestinians (like Christian and Jewish Palestinians) are not citizens of Israel and are therefore are not entitled to any privileges associated with being a citizen of that country. The Palestianian Authority has authority over them. If Palestinians need more rights, the PA should be who you're complaining to, not Israel.
The Arabs that are not citizens of Israel are currently not represented by a government. They have very few legal protections in Israel. The Palestinian authority lacks the capacity and sovereignty needed to represent these people. This represents a direct threat to both the Liberal and Jewish nature of the Israeli democracy.

(Whoever critisizes Israel actions) is an anti-Semitic..yeah.. i heard that one before.. Nice try.

Try again.

yeah.. i heard that one before.. Nice try.

Try again.

Not fair OD. You've complained of people doing that to you in that past.

I'd believe Jewwatch as much as I'd believe jihadwatch.

Source it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5124152.stmIn it, Hamas accepted the idea of a Palestinian state on the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem.

Because of what they did not say, it can be interpreted as an implicit recognition of Israel. Hamas people moved quickly to challenge that.

One of the Hamas MPs, Salah al-Bardaweel, told the Reuters news agency that "We said we accept a state (in territory occupied) in 1967 - but we did not say we accept two states."

Read into it what you want. Says everything and says nothing at the same time.

Hamas has shown some willingness to come to an agreement with Israel and I consider it a mistake to isolate Hamas.

Israel isn't going to come to an agreement with Hamas's "All Jews die and Israel gets destroyed" plan. Frankly, I can't blame them for not wanting to agree with that one. Israel's continuous opinion has been thtat there is nothing wrong with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip becomming a Palestinian state. Problem is, they become a state and suddenly Palestine has to take care of itself instead of complaining and blaming Israel for all of its problems. Moreover, they would no longer be able to leech off of Israel's economy.

Becoming a state is actually not in Hamas's interest right now. That is why they aren't a state yet, not because Israel has a problem with it. By not being a state, they can continue to promote and increase hatred of Israel and the Jews while not being accountable for their actions because they're not really a state.

It is problematic that Arab Israeli’s have lesser access to public works than Jewish Israeli’s. This cannot be beneficial to Israeli society.

Less access to public works? I'm not sure what you mean by this, exactly. Have you forgotten that Arabic is an official language of Israel?

The Arabs that are not citizens of Israel are currently not represented by a government.

They are represented by the PA.

They have very few legal protections in Israel.

Resident aliens have very few legal protections regardless of which country you go to.

The Palestinian authority lacks the capacity and sovereignty needed to represent these people. This represents a direct threat to both the Liberal and Jewish nature of the Israeli democracy.

The Palestinian Authority doesn't seem to have any trouble censoring the Palestinian media, controlling the flow of information and developing anti-Israel propoganda. It doesn't seem to have trouble managing its border with Egypt, nor does it seem to have trouble arresting journalists who don't agree with its views. It doesn't seem to have any difficulty sending trained suicide bombers across the border to kill themselves on busses and in markets. It doesn't seem to have trouble arresting people for being gay and blocking freedom of religion where it is possible to do so.

The fact that it acts legal sovereignty is a misnomer. The PA is the only government in Palestine, and it has the power and the authority to do what it wants. (Coveniently, though, without statehood it can strip rights away from people without accountability.)

Lately on the news no clear pictures have been drawn about Hezbollah. They fire rockets at Israeli citizens, they give money out to people who lose their homes, they have (supposebly) agreed to the cease fire, they are looking to wipe out the "Zionist mentality" and they gain support every day in Lebanon (most probably because Israel bombed the crap out of their homes). I'm a little confused here. Discuss?

They are evil to those they are attempting to remove from the earth by force and by terrorist actions . At the same time they are hero's to those who feel the same way they do.

Much like the US was a hero to those who hated communism and evil to those who embraced it .

here you go

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-genocide-palestinian-apartheidlaws.html#anchor20227

Dude you're seriously using Jewwatch as a source? That's like using Stormfront to find out about black people. It's racist and stupid.

here you go

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-genocide-palestinian-apartheidlaws.html#anchor20227

Nazi/anti-semtic bolloxology. Please fuck off, tyvm.

Nazi/anti-semtic bolloxology. Please fuck off, tyvm.

Has anyone noticed that the only one to support the use of that site has been OD?

I'm still waiting for BS to defend their use of the protocols.

Has anyone noticed that the only one to support the use of that site has been OD?

I'm still waiting for BS to defend their use of the protocols.

Heh... found this on wiki:
Jew Watch is another site Stormfront's administrator, Don Black, reportedly provided hosting or maintenance for in the past.
Surprising?

Has anyone noticed that the only one to support the use of that site has been OD?

I'm still waiting for BS to defend their use of the protocols.

He probably believes them.

As a bit of trvia, apparently Elvis is on the list.

*edit - here he is....
http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-entertainment-elvis-presley.html

He probably believes them.

As a bit of trvia, apparently Elvis is on the list.

*edit - here he is....
http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-entertainment-elvis-presley.html

It gets even funnier. Apparently every Nazi group in the US is a Zionist front.

http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-hatehoaxes-american-nazis.html

Homosexuality is a "Jewish Mind Control Mechanism".

Care to defend this BS or OD?

Someone's been reading the Illuminatus Trilogy to much.