NationStates Jolt Archive

"The Israeli government says it plans to build 700 new homes in two settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5312084.stm

War and conquest by cement and brick.

And when this gets a reaction from the peoples whose occupied territory it is...."Why don't they want peace?" "Why aren't they 'civillised?'".

I'm not from America, so just as a general question....If I took over 50 acres of somebodys property in, say Texas, and started building on it, what kind of reaction would I get? Flowers in the post? A harsh look perchance?

If you do it in the right neighborhood, you might get urban renewal grants.

If you do it in the right neighborhood, you might get urban renewal grants.


Well I'm glad to know they do at home as they seem to foster abroad.

If you do it in the right neighborhood, you might get urban renewal grants.

Or, if you're the government, it's eminent domain.

This is almost certainly a political move. Olmert's popularity took an enormous dive after pulling the IDF out of Lebanon: the Israelis wanted him to take a firmer stance on Hezbollah. He's probably doing this to reassert his authority by starting a fight with the Palestinians instead.

Or, if you're the government, it's eminent domain.

Well, you get the government to use eminent domain to keep your purchase price down, and then you get them to give you the urban renewal grant to cover your expenses and get the thing built and sell it at a profit.

Sheesh, and they want peace with the palestinians... :confused:

Good for them. Each time there is an unprovoked terror attack against Israel, they should build more settlements in the "Occupied Territories." They are fighting against an enemy that seeks the destruction of the state of Israel -- they have been fighting against that enemy since the 40s. The only way to end the war is to show them that Israel will not give in to their demands unless they agree to a peaceful solution. One way of accomplishing this goal is by continuing to build settlements despite rocket attacks and kidnappings. Maybe the terrorists will eventually come to their senses and stop mindlessly attacking Israel, but until then, I fully support Israel in trying to confine them to areas in which they do not pose a grave danger.

And this isn't exactly on topic, but it fits here better than anywhere else right now:

http://www.msnbc.com/comics/comics/nq060904.gif

Sheesh, and they want peace with the palestinians... :confused:

Doesn't justify terrorism, but it doesn't exactly help the situation.

I foresee..... I foresee flames.... lots of flames....

I foresee..... I foresee flames.... lots of flames....It's been kind of quiet in Moderation for the last couple of weeks. About time someone woke them up. :p

Begoner21;11637433']Good for them. Each time there is an unprovoked terror attack against Israel, they should build more settlements in the "Occupied Territories." They are fighting against an enemy that seeks the destruction of the state of Israel -- they have been fighting against that enemy since the 40s. The only way to end the war is to show them that Israel will not give in to their demands unless they agree to a peaceful solution. One way of accomplishing this goal is by continuing to build settlements despite rocket attacks and kidnappings. Maybe the terrorists will eventually come to their senses and stop mindlessly attacking Israel, but until then, I fully support Israel in trying to confine them to areas in which they do not pose a grave danger.

Okay then. Make the Palestinians hate Israel even more. Great idea!

Man this is like an international game of one ups.

Okay then. Make the Palestinians hate Israel even more. Great idea!

They hate Israel because it exists. They were not willing to give up a small amount of their land, mostly desert, as compensation for 6,000,000 Jews who died in the Holocaust -- instead, they went to war when the UN allotted Israel that land. They're going to hate Israel no matter what, and Israel needs to protect itself from terror attacks. Building settlements is an excellent way of doing so.

Begoner21;11637462']They hate Israel because it exists. They were not willing to give up a small amount of their land, mostly desert, as compensation for 6,000,000 Jews who died in the Holocaust -- instead, they went to war when the UN allotted Israel that land. They're going to hate Israel no matter what, and Israel needs to protect itself from terror attacks. Building settlements is an excellent way of doing so.
And Israel's done nothing in the time since it came into existence to make the situation worse?

Begoner21;11637462']They hate Israel because it exists. They were not willing to give up a small amount of their land, mostly desert, as compensation for 6,000,000 Jews who died in the Holocaust -- instead, they went to war when the UN allotted Israel that land. They're going to hate Israel no matter what, and Israel needs to protect itself from terror attacks. Building settlements is an excellent way of doing so.

And this has what to do with the Palestinians in general? Last time I checked they didn't commit the Holocaust.

Begoner21;11637462']They're going to hate Israel no matter what, and Israel needs to protect itself from terror attacks. Building settlements is an excellent way of doing so.

Wait, how does building settlements, and displacing native Palestinian settlements, going to protect Israel from terror attacks?

Are you a student of history at all? Are you aware that virtually every "barbarian" group came into being because they were displaced by "civilized" populations, given the shitty hinterlands and given every reason to hate the ones?

This is just going to add to the cycle of terrorism in Israel. Won't protect a damn thing.

And this has what to do with the Palestinians in general? Last time I checked they didn't commit the Holocaust.

No, they didn't. I am simply saying that the Palestinians were unwilling to allow Jews to settle on their land despite the horrors which they faced. If someone was shot and you could save their life by calling 911, you don't go and shoot them yourself -- you help them by calling 911. If the Jews were ethnically cleansed and you could help them by giving up a bit of land, you do so -- you don't go to war against them.

Begoner21;11637501']No, they didn't. I am simply saying that the Palestinians were unwilling to allow Jews to settle on their land despite the horrors which they faced. If someone was shot and you could save their life by calling 911, you don't go and shoot them yourself -- you help them by calling 911. If the Jews were ethnically cleansed and you could help them by giving up a bit of land, you do so -- you don't go to war against them.

I think the Palestinian counterargument would be "then give them some of your land. Why should we give them ours?"

Wait, how does building settlements, and displacing native Palestinian settlements, going to protect Israel from terror attacks?

As long as there is a smaller area from which terror attacks could be launched, it is easier to patrol those areas and stop any potential terrorists. If the West Bank was the size of Vatican City, it would be even easier to stop terror attacks.

I think the Palestinian counterargument would be "then give them some of your land. Why should we give them ours?"

It wasn't their land. It was Britain's land. They didn't have a say in it -- it was decided way back when in 1917 that a Jewish state was to be created in Palestine. The British followed up on their promise and gave up some of Britain's land to create Israel.

This is just going to add to the cycle of terrorism in Israel. Won't protect a damn thing.

But it will give them ALITTLE more land.

Begoner21;11637513']It wasn't their land. It was Britain's land. They didn't have a say in it -- it was decided way back when in 1917 that a Jewish state was to be created in Palestine. The British followed up on their promise and gave up some of Britain's land to create Israel.

Here we go....

I'm done. Not going over this again. *leaves thread*

Begoner21;11637513']It wasn't their land. It was Britain's land. They didn't have a say in it -- it was decided way back when in 1917 that a Jewish state was to be created in Palestine. The British followed up on their promise and gave up some of Britain's land to create Israel.

Far as I remember, there were few if any British citizens who were forced out of their homes to make way for Israeli immigrants. It was Palestinians who got shafted, and who are still pissed about it, and with some right to be. Now I'm not saying Israel doesn't have the right to exist--they certainly do--but let's not act as though the Palestinians don't have a legitimate grievance about the way they got fucked.

Begoner21;11637462']They hate Israel because it exists. They were not willing to give up a small amount of their land, mostly desert, as compensation for 6,000,000 Jews who died in the Holocaust -- instead, they went to war when the UN allotted Israel that land.

Although this argument has no bearing of the current situation at all (whinging over who started it would last all year, we's get nowhere, and decide the Dinosaurs were there forst), I personally see no reason why the middle east Arabs ought to pay for the holocaust anyway, just like there's no reason I'd pay a stranger's fine for traveling on a train without a ticket.

Begoner21;11637462']They're going to hate Israel no matter what, and Israel needs to protect itself from terror attacks. Building settlements is an excellent way of doing so.

So, you seriously think that what borders, if not actually, encouraging terrorism is going to protect Israel from terror attacks? Israel can't expect Palestinian terrorists to stop attacking Israel when it takes Palestinian land. As nice as that would be, it's simply not going to happen. Furthermore, this simply hands the terrorists on a plate "proof" (for lack of a better word) that Israel can't be trusted, and if anything will push people towards terrorism, not from it.

Fuelling the fire won't put it out. At least, that's how I see it.

Begoner21;11637513']It wasn't their land. It was Britain's land. They didn't have a say in it -- it was decided way back when in 1917 that a Jewish state was to be created in Palestine. The British followed up on their promise and gave up some of Britain's land to create Israel.

O, some times I get annoyed at peoples ignorance and sometimes I laugh...occassionally i'm almost forced to tears.....It wasn't "Britains land". You have to go do some reading on what the Mandate actually was. Secondly they also promised the Arabs independence for fighting against the Turks.

Thirdly, all of this is happening outside the state of Israel.....

I like the idea of civillian housing being a good barrier against attack though...obviously they need some more semi-detached housing in Iraq around that "green zone"...and that demiltarised zone in Korea could do with a few bungalows too.....

Let's not act as though the Palestinians don't have a legitimate grievance about the way they got fucked.

The Palestinians got "fucked" within the confines of the law. Their government decided to allot land to create an Israeli state, and took necessary measures to ensure to success of the project. The Palestinians responded with open warfare. It would be equivalent to US citizens rebelling against the government if Hawaii were given independence.

Begoner21;11637576']The Palestinians got "fucked" within the confines of the law. Their government decided to allot land to create an Israeli state, and took necessary measures to ensure to success of the project. The Palestinians responded with open warfare. It would be equivalent to US citizens rebelling against the government if Hawaii were given independence.

No, it would be equivalent if the US government gave Hawaii to a group of private citizens, and then tossed everyone living on Hawaii off and told them to go fuck themselves, and then was surprised when the people living there were pissed off about it and decided to resist the only way they could.

Begoner21;11637506']As long as there is a smaller area from which terror attacks could be launched, it is easier to patrol those areas and stop any potential terrorists. If the West Bank was the size of Vatican City, it would be even easier to stop terror attacks.

Well shit, you know what would be even easiest? If Israel just conquered the entire Middle East and deported all Muslims to Africa! Then there'd be even fewer areas from which potential terrorists could potentially launch a potential attack. YAY JUSTIFICATION!

Begoner21;11637501']No, they didn't. I am simply saying that the Palestinians were unwilling to allow Jews to settle on their land despite the horrors which they faced. If someone was shot and you could save their life by calling 911, you don't go and shoot them yourself -- you help them by calling 911. If the Jews were ethnically cleansed and you could help them by giving up a bit of land, you do so -- you don't go to war against them.

All right. Hypothetical situation. Two brothers are walking down a street. Someone walks up and shoots one of them. A judge decides to give your living room to the surviving brother as compensation. Does that make sense?

The palestinians need to be supplied with sophisticated weapons to stop this.

We are all forgetting that Palestinians as an anscestry don't exist. Upon conquering Judea and Semaria in 70 BC, the Roman Empire renamed Israel, Phalestine. The country is ficticious and was a creation of super powers.

If the Palestinians had wanted statehood so badly - what has taken them so long. They didn't speak up during the Ottoman Turk Empire and did not take advantage of the 2 state option. Rather, Israel's entire existence was attacked on multiple accounts by the surrounding Arab nations. They care not for the Palestinian "plight", but rather are using it for there own media purposes int he post 1967 world. How else could you explain the slaughter of tens of thousands of Palestinians in Jordan?

If the Palestinians want land that much, why haven't Jordan, Egypt, or Syria offered some of theirs! That is because every sane country would like to avoid a population represented by a militant terrorist group supporting violence as valid political methods.

Say what you want, but please don't be ingnorant.

We are all forgetting that Palestinians as an anscestry don't exist. Upon conquering Judea and Semaria in 70 BC, the Roman Empire renamed Israel, Phalestine. The country is ficticious and was a creation of super powers.

The old "there are no Palestinians" line. Gosh, if the country and ancestry doesn't exist, I guess those Palestinians the Israeli media and government refer to are actually just Jews??


If the Palestinians had wanted statehood so badly - what has taken them so long. They didn't speak up during the Ottoman Turk Empire and did not take advantage of the 2 state option.

So you are saying Palestinians don't want statehood, because they didn't speak up (as in rebel and get slaughtered) during the Ottoman Empire?

How supremely idiotic. If they don't want statehood, what's all the fighting about?


If the Palestinians want land that much, why haven't Jordan, Egypt, or Syria offered some of theirs!

Uh, whether Jordan, Egypt or Syria gives land to Palestinians has NOTHING to do with how much Palestinians want land.

Say what you want, but please don't be ingnorant.

I'd say the same for you if I knew it would do any good.

I say fuck this all, return to the Crusader States of the Holy Land!

Well shit, you know what would be even easiest? If Israel just conquered the entire Middle East and deported all Muslims to Africa! Then there'd be even fewer areas from which potential terrorists could potentially launch a potential attack. YAY JUSTIFICATION!

That would not be easy in any way, and it would not be justified. There are many countries in the Middle East which are not in a state of war with Israel. Palestinian militias (and the government) are at war with Israel, although they try to hide it behind a diplomatic facade. However, I am for implementation of the Elon Peace Plan. It is a comprehensive solution to the problems in the Middle East and would allow the Israeli people some security while doing away with "Palestine."

Sheesh, and they want peace with the palestinians... :confused:

No they don't. They want the kind of peace that comes from being on the right side of the biggest guns.

Wait, how does building settlements, and displacing native Palestinian settlements, going to protect Israel from terror attacks?

No one is being displaced. Standing settlements are beng expanded, not new ones being formed after the expulsion of Palestinians. In fact, land in the hands of the Jews was always bought from Arabs, sometimes for higher prices, etc. It wouldn't be truthful to say people were displaced because of settlements. Another great example is Tel Aviv, the first all Jewish city.

This is just going to add to the cycle of terrorism in Israel. Won't protect a damn thing.

Well Israel pulled out of Lebanon 6 years ago and that was the whole reason for Hizballahs existence, or so says the left and the terrorists. Israel got attacked again even after they withdrew from Lebanon. Same goes for Gaza after the pullout. All Israel got was more rockets. Like was saidbefore, settlements aren't the problems for the Pals, it's Israel's existence. So pulling out of any territories most definately does more bad for Israel than good.

The old "there are no Palestinians" line. Gosh, if the country and ancestry doesn't exist, I guess those Palestinians the Israeli media and government refer to are actually just Jews??

Palestinians are simply Arabs that lived in the region that is now Israel and was known as Palestine after the Romans renamed it as such. They share the same culture, language, and heritage as the Arabs living in Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, etc. There never was an autonomous Palestinian State. There was the Ottoman Empire and then British Mandate and then Israel. No Palestine.

Begoner21;11637462']They hate Israel because it exists.
They mostly hate Israel because it smashes down their houses and generally oppresses and/or kills them, I think you'll find.
They were not willing to give up a small amount of their land, mostly desert, as compensation for 6,000,000 Jews who died in the Holocaust
Which was not really their fault, so I can hardly blame them.
instead, they went to war when the UN allotted Israel that land.
OK - let's use an example that you'll probably find easy to understand that is similar and relevant today, and let's see how you take it.

The Egyptians declare war on the Libyans and kill almost all of them, as well as annihilating the descendants of the Libyans that once lived in Egypt.

The US clearly does not like these people, nor is it the US' fault in the slightest, but seeing as a lot of the US is unnocupied, the Libyan survivors of the war are then given a good-sized region of middle America, and then claim that they are the chosen people of the region, and treat the US citizens in the area like shit.

How would you take that?
They're going to hate Israel no matter what
The feeling's been mutual for thousands of years.

The UN could hardly have picked a worse place to put Israel, to be honest.
Israel needs to protect itself from terror attacks.
The best way of doing so would be to be as reasonable as possible with the Palestinians, and giving them aid packages to help rebuild what they have destroyed, as well as pulling their troops out of the area.

This would ease tensions and the Palestinians would feel they had a possibly good future, which would stop a lot of the young people from taking up arms against Israel, instead they would try and work towards creating a better future for themselves and their families.

That's going to work a lot better than collective punishment, which wasn't fair in the Warsaw Ghettos, and it hasn't become fair in the last sixty-two years somehow.
Building settlements is an excellent way of doing so.
No, the settlements will just be attacked and the whole cycle will perpetuate...

Begoner21;11637462']They hate Israel because it exists. They were not willing to give up a small amount of their land, mostly desert, as compensation for 6,000,000 Jews who died in the Holocaust -- instead, they went to war when the UN allotted Israel that land. They're going to hate Israel no matter what, and Israel needs to protect itself from terror attacks. Building settlements is an excellent way of doing so.

While I agree that the Jews and Israel have legitimate claims to the land, you have to shy away from legitmizing Israel's existence by bringing up the Holocaust. The fact is that Zionism was created long before the Holocaust, in the later 19th century. In fact, the Balfour Declaration was signed 20+ years before the Holocaust. The BD is the document pledging on behalf of the british the idea of "looking favorablyy upon establishing a Jewish state in Palestine." The only impact the Holocaust had on the establishment of Israel was the giving of the Negev desert to Israel in order to faciliate the mass immigration of Jews to Israel from europe.

We are all forgetting that Palestinians as an anscestry don't exist. Upon conquering Judea and Semaria in 70 BC, the Roman Empire renamed Israel, Phalestine. The country is ficticious and was a creation of super powers.

If the Palestinians had wanted statehood so badly - what has taken them so long. They didn't speak up during the Ottoman Turk Empire and did not take advantage of the 2 state option. Rather, Israel's entire existence was attacked on multiple accounts by the surrounding Arab nations. They care not for the Palestinian "plight", but rather are using it for there own media purposes int he post 1967 world. How else could you explain the slaughter of tens of thousands of Palestinians in Jordan?

If the Palestinians want land that much, why haven't Jordan, Egypt, or Syria offered some of theirs! That is because every sane country would like to avoid a population represented by a militant terrorist group supporting violence as valid political methods.

Say what you want, but please don't be ingnorant.

thats quite the first post.

if the palestinians dont exist, they arent fighting back, so whats the problem?


and you spelt ignorant wrong, which is apt for that little racist rant.

Palestinians are simply Arabs that lived in the region that is now Israel and was known as Palestine after the Romans renamed it as such. They share the same culture, language, and heritage as the Arabs living in Jordan, Syria, Egypt, Lebanon, etc. There never was an autonomous Palestinian State. There was the Ottoman Empire and then British Mandate and then Israel. No Palestine.

So what?

You are arguing FOR a Jewish state on Arab land by denying an ancient people a contemporary nation state? :confused: Are ethnic groups entitled to certain lands by the virtue of history or not?

If the Jews are entitled to a synthetic state decided by outside forces, how can you argue that another group, who never left their land, arent entitled to the same?

Passive Aggressive revenge it sounds like.

So what?

You are arguing FOR a Jewish state on Arab land by denying an ancient people a contemporary nation state? :confused: Are ethnic groups entitled to certain lands by the virtue of history or not?

If the Jews are entitled to a synthetic state decided by outside forces, how can you argue that another group, who never left their land, arent entitled to the same?


Jews never left the land. The majority were expelled after the Roman victory over the Jewish revolt and destruction of the Temple, but Jewish communities remained thereafter and continue today, most notably in Sefad, Hebron, and Jerusalem.

I'm saying that the palestinans are simply Arabs that lived in the region, NOT state of Palestine under the Ottomans and that when the Ottomans lost in WWI, the British gained control and the UN then gave the part of the land to the Jews(where there were majority Jewish populations) and designated the Arab majority land to be a Palestinian state. The Arabs said no and invaded and killed 6,000 Jews. They were beaten back and Israel took borders that would be more defensible.

EDIT: 6,000 not million..typo, sorry all

No one is being displaced. Standing settlements are beng expanded, not new ones being formed after the expulsion of Palestinians. In fact, land in the hands of the Jews was always bought from Arabs, sometimes for higher prices, etc. It wouldn't be truthful to say people were displaced because of settlements. Another great example is Tel Aviv, the first all Jewish city..

It wouldn't be truthful would it?

Heres Tel Rumeida. This what having settlers for neighbours is like. Presumably this is all about the evil Palestinian desire not to lend sugar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkVDyfuvhDE&mode=related&search=
And the funny part is that some are apparently far worse than that bunch.

From the Arab-Jewish Partnership for Peace
"When Ta’ayush found out that settlers near the Maon farms were leaving barley containing rat poison for the Palestinians’ livestock, Ta’ayush participants collected the poison and disposed of it. "
http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Nov2005/nettnin1105.html

And theres poisoning wells, shootings, beatings, setting dogs on the locals, preventing the children going to school...all with the IDF looking on.....What was that phrase ?" a light of democracy in the middle east"? Big difference from being brutalised by some dictatorship....or terrorised by bearded religous fanatics....

The Arabs said no and invaded and killed 6,000,000 Jews. .

did they? did they really? :D

you are usually slightly less wrong than that....

did they? did they really? :D

you are usually slightly less wrong than that....

lol sorry everyone, i meant 6,000...thats six thousand, not million...truly silly of me.

lol sorry everyone, i meant 6,000...thats six thousand, not million...truly silly of me.

dammit, you distracted me from the large flamelike row we were going to have!!! ;)

It wouldn't be truthful would it?

Heres Tel Rumeida. This what having settlers for neighbours is like. Presumably this is all about the evil Palestinian desire not to lend sugar
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkVDyfuvhDE&mode=related&search=
And the funny part is that some are apparently far worse than that bunch.

Honestly, I don't support the actions of all settlers, neither do I of all Americans or anyone else. There are always exceptions. I don't know what exactly these people are attacking or trying to break into, only what I am being told by those which obviosly have an agenda. Want me to post video of suicide bombings, because "thats what its like having palestinians for neighbors."

From the Arab-Jewish Partnership for Peace
"When Ta’ayush found out that settlers near the Maon farms were leaving barley containing rat poison for the Palestinians’ livestock, Ta’ayush participants collected the poison and disposed of it. "
http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Nov2005/nettnin1105.html

And theres poisoning wells, shootings, beatings, setting dogs on the locals, preventing the children going to school...all with the IDF looking on.....What was that phrase ?" a light of democracy in the middle east"? Big difference from being brutalised by some dictatorship....or terrorised by bearded religous fanatics....

Opened the page, saw the cartoon about roman times and the Jews referring to "Palestinians," and decided it wasnt worth the read. Palestinians are ARABS. They hold no ancestry to the ancient Phillistines. They are Arabs as much as the Jordanians are Arabs. They arent a Palestinian nationality, its Arab nationality. Therefore, I'm gonna pass on the article written by people that claim such a fallacy.

They mostly hate Israel because it smashes down their houses and generally oppresses and/or kills them, I think you'll find.

No, they hated Israel even before the Israeli military took action against terrorists. From the first day of the foundation of Israel, Arabs have hated it. The Israelis simply wanted peace and to co-exist with the Arabs, but the Arabs couldn't have that. No, they declared war on Israel almost as soon as the state was established. Over time, Israel has grown stronger and the Arab states have grown weaker. Nonetheless, there are incessant terrorist attacks against Israel. The governments of the neighboring Arab states condone this method of terrorism and take no action against it. I cannot blame Israel for defending itself the way it has.

The Egyptians declare war on the Libyans and kill almost all of them, as well as annihilating the descendants of the Libyans that once lived in Egypt. The US clearly does not like these people, nor is it the US' fault in the slightest, but seeing as a lot of the US is unnocupied, the Libyan survivors of the war are then given a good-sized region of middle America, and then claim that they are the chosen people of the region, and treat the US citizens in the area like shit. How would you take that?

First of all, the British government agreed to the formation of the state of Israel -- it was not created against their will. That means, for your analogy to be apt, that the US government volunteered land in central America for the Libyans. Since ours is a democratic government, I would certainly not be happy, but I would accept it. I would not like that the Libyans treat the Americans like shit, but I would certainly not try to exterminate all Libyans simply because I do not like them. I'd treat them much the same way I treat liberals -- as an unfortunate necessity. Over time, I might be grateful that they have turned a barren region into a economically viable area and that they industrialized and modernized the area.

The best way of doing so would be to be as reasonable as possible with the Palestinians, and giving them aid packages to help rebuild what they have destroyed, as well as pulling their troops out of the area. This would ease tensions and the Palestinians would feel they had a possibly good future, which would stop a lot of the young people from taking up arms against Israel, instead they would try and work towards creating a better future for themselves and their families. That's going to work a lot better than collective punishment, which wasn't fair in the Warsaw Ghettos, and it hasn't become fair in the last sixty-two years somehow. No, the settlements will just be attacked and the whole cycle will perpetuate...

What a genial idea. Let's give them aid packages so they can spend a higher percentage of their GDP on weapons. At the same time, we'll be sending the message that it's OK for them to attack us, because we'll help them rebuild what we destroyed in retaliation, so no harm done. And pulling troops out! Excellent idea -- what we don't know can't hurt us. After all, what bad could come out of every Palestinian citizen being armed with an AK-47 and just waiting to slaughter some Israelis? We'll have no troops to protect against that eventuality! Oh, and take a look at what happened when Israel pulled out of Gaza:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5293854.stm

It's hard to administer selective punishment when terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah use civilian shields, and then blame the Israelis for shooting both the terrorist and the civilian. If they choose to take civilians hostage, then they should incur the punishment for the death of those civilians, not Israel.

Begoner21;11638788']No, they hated Israel even before the Israeli military took action against terrorists. From the first day of the foundation of Israel, Arabs have hated it.
Because it's in their bloody land, which was taken off them for reasons beyond their control...
The Israelis simply wanted peace and to co-exist with the Arabs, but the Arabs couldn't have that.
Bullshit of the highest order, they proclaimed themselves to be the "chosen people" of the area and were sabre-rattling pretty quickly.
No, they declared war on Israel almost as soon as the state was established.
This is correct...
First of all, the British government agreed to the formation of the state of Israel -- it was not created against their will.
The British Government did not speak for the people of Palestine in any way, shape or form. It was given the Mandate of Palestine for some reason, when really the UN should have made Palestine a country unto itself, with its own government.
That means, for your analogy to be apt, that the US government volunteered land in central America for the Libyans.
No, to be apt, the UN would requisition somewhere which the US controls by default if nothing else, like Hawaii (which was annexed); the Hawaiians are not best pleased, but the US says "hey, whatever" and gives it to the Libyans against the will of the people of Hawaii, whilst giving the Libyans ludicrous amounts of weaponry and basically a license to do whatever the hell they liked.
Since ours is a democratic government, I would certainly not be happy, but I would accept it. I would not like that the Libyans treat the Americans like shit, but I would certainly not try to exterminate all Libyans simply because I do not like them. I'd treat them much the same way I treat liberals -- as an unfortunate necessity. Over time, I might be grateful that they have turned a barren region into a economically viable area and that they industrialized and modernized the area.
Pure conjecture.

They've taken your land and are shooting up your relatives and the rest of the world endorses this - is that fair in the slightest?
What a genial idea. Let's give them aid packages so they can spend a higher percentage of their GDP on weapons.
Aid is not just money, it can be engineers to help rebuild the country, raw materials such as cement, food aid, sending them machinery to help in their factories etc. They're not going to throw cheese sandwiches at you, are they?
At the same time, we'll be sending the message that it's OK for them to attack us, because we'll help them rebuild what we destroyed in retaliation, so no harm done.
Or possibly you're sending the message "we are no longer your enemies", by not blowing their houses up and ruining their land.
And pulling troops out! Excellent idea -- what we don't know can't hurt us.
"What we don't know can't hurt us"?

What the fuck are you on about?
After all, what bad could come out of every Palestinian citizen being armed with an AK-47 and just waiting to slaughter some Israelis?
A lot of bad, clearly, but if you turn the Palestinian public to your side, then it's all to the good.
We'll have no troops to protect against that eventuality!
So you're intimidating the Palestinians less and making them much less jumpy...
It's hard to administer selective punishment when terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah use civilian shields, and then blame the Israelis for shooting both the terrorist and the civilian.
Israel never, ever has to fire a single shot if it wants to.

But it does, for some unfathomable reason, which is saddening.

If you don't know who to arrest/shoot/smash the house of, then don't do it. Full stop.
If they choose to take civilians hostage, then they should incur the punishment for the death of those civilians, not Israel.
HAMAS and Hizbollah didn't take any civilians hostage, they took soldiers hostage, and I think you'll find that you can't place the blame on either of the two, the Israelis needn't have done what they did to Lebanon at all...

Begoner21;11638788']snip

even the so called 'jew crew' on this site dont try and propagandise that clumsily.

are you with a straight face going to claim palestinaian resistance is nothing to do with the foundation of an alien state on their land?

because the colonising british gave the land to the Jews in 47 its all hunky dory and not theft? israel wasnt created against the palestinians will?

isreal is the innocent victim in all this, they bear no responsiblility for any of this mess. for fucks sake grow up, even the hardest likud supporter will point to strategic errors along the way

even the so called 'jew crew' on this site dont try and propagandise that clumsily.

are you with a straight face going to claim palestinaian resistance is nothing to do with the foundation of an alien state on their land?

because the colonising british gave the land to the Jews in 47 its all hunky dory and not theft? israel wasnt created against the palestinians will?

isreal is the innocent victim in all this, they bear no responsiblility for any of this mess. for fucks sake grow up, even the hardest likud supporter will point to strategic errors along the way

Nice slip in of the word "colonising." If you weren't aware, all land that was Jewish prior to '48 was bought and owned by Jews, not stolen or part of any "theft." Only after the Arabs rejected a non-Arab, non-Muslim state in the Middle East (and along with it a PALESTINIAN STATE there as well) did Israel gain more land and that was after the Arabs launched a war of annihilation and killed 6,000 Jews.

The Arab states of Jordan and Egypt then annexed the West Bank and Gaza Strip respectively. Didn't see any Palestinian resistance then. How strange.

The Arabs said no and invaded and killed 6,000,000 Jews. They were beaten back and Israel took borders that would be more defensible.


What orifice did you pull that from, and was it bleeding afterwards?

Honestly, I don't support the actions of all settlers, neither do I of all Americans or anyone else. There are always exceptions. I don't know what exactly these people are attacking or trying to break into, only what I am being told by those which obviosly have an agenda. Want me to post video of suicide bombings, because "thats what its like having palestinians for neighbors.".

Actually the correct term would be "having Palestinians as an occupied populace". And thats ok, because thats the impression the bombings are meant to leave.



Opened the page, saw the cartoon about roman times and the Jews referring to "Palestinians," and decided it wasnt worth the read. Palestinians are ARABS. They hold no ancestry to the ancient Phillistines. They are Arabs as much as the Jordanians are Arabs. They arent a Palestinian nationality, its Arab nationality. Therefore, I'm gonna pass on the article written by people that claim such a fallacy.

Yeah....I wonder when the kids that read the pro-settler magazine saw the comic strip that concluded the only good Arab was a dead Arab passed on that similarily and joined a Jewish-Arab peace movement...one can only hope........

I like way the muslims get stick for objecting to their chief holy man being mocked, but you can't even look at the word "Palestinian" without getting in a hissy fit....

Here's similar poisoning activity....with no cartoons.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3891531.stm

http://news.scotsman.com/international.cfm?id=446982005

Begoner21;11637462']They hate Israel because it exists. They were not willing to give up a small amount of their land, mostly desert, as compensation for 6,000,000 Jews who died in the Holocaust -- instead, they went to war when the UN allotted Israel that land. They're going to hate Israel no matter what, and Israel needs to protect itself from terror attacks. Building settlements is an excellent way of doing so.funniest post ever Palestians have to compensate the Jews of the world for what Nazi's crimes, priceless logic----here's another-let's compensate native americans for the crimes against them, let's give them Eygpt!!!

"settlement" is a euphamism for the old Lebensraum crime and should be dealt with militarily.

The Palestinians need sophisticated weapons to keep the israeli military away.

The threat of being massacred is very real, as was demonstrated in Lebanon.

Nice slip in of the word "colonising." If you weren't aware, all land that was Jewish prior to '48 was bought and owned by Jews, not stolen or part of any "theft."

And how much land was that, as a percentage of the Area of the Mandate?

Or in Acres/Dunums? I'll give you a margin of error of 50,000 without contradicting you....can't get fairer than that......

By the way, are you more comfortable discussing what happened in 1948 than whats happening now as per the OP?

funniest post ever Palestians have to compensate the Jews of the world for what Nazi's crimes, priceless logic----here's another-let's compensate native americans for the crimes against them, let's give them Eygpt!!!

If the UN and the Egyptian government approve of that idea, I don't see a reason why they should not be given the land. Keep in mind that the "Palestinians" didn't compensate anybody -- it was the British who compensated the Jews, as had been proposed in the Balfour Declaration, which preceded WWII and the Holocaust. However, in light of the Holocaust, it's hard to see what the British subjects in Palestine had to compain about. "Oh, no, we're going to lose a large part of infertile desert land! Let's just kill the Jews who come here, despite their great suffereing in recent times. After all, they lost 6 million people, but we don't want to lose a bit of land."

actually the idea for Israel was formed earlier than WW2 so had nothing to do with compensaton-The Balfour Declaration-an idea pushed through to gain financial aid from jewish groups-(Banker Rothschild) the Palestineans were basiclly sold out for $$$ after they agreed to aid the allies in driving out the Ottomans which in return they would get their independent homelend-

"settlement" is a euphamism for the old Lebensraum crime and should be dealt with militarily.

The Palestinians need sophisticated weapons to keep the israeli military away.

The threat of being massacred is very real, as was demonstrated in Lebanon.

I admire your stand Sir, and agree 100%. However I must point out that as Gaza and the West Bank are effectively "reservations" in which the population live at the sufferance of the occupier. There is little chance of any armed group being able to arm or train to the extent required. However, as Hezbollah have shown, it is possible, in the right circumstances....

funniest post ever Palestians have to compensate the Jews of the world for what Nazi's crimes, priceless logic----here's another-let's compensate native americans for the crimes against them, let's give them Eygpt!!!

Really palestine was British territory, so i'd be the british compensating for the holocaust. Also there was a plan to establish a jewish state before wwII even started. After the Ottoman empire collapsed it's territory was split up among the allied nations, palestine and Iraq to britain, Syria to France etc. the whole problem stems from the whole "spoils of war" custom back in the early 1900s. The original British plan was to have a jewish and Arab state, both equal in power and self-rule. Trouble is the Jews living in europe absolutely stampeded to the new state and began to organize, creating terrorist groups, even private underground armies. The British didn't want to hold on to that hot-potato so they pulled out and never called again...

Begoner21;11642201']If the UN and the Egyptian government approve of that idea, I don't see a reason why they should not be given the land. Keep in mind that the "Palestinians" didn't compensate anybody -- it was the British who compensated the Jews, as had been proposed in the Balfour Declaration, which preceded WWII and the Holocaust. However, in light of the Holocaust, it's hard to see what the British subjects in Palestine had to compain about. "Oh, no, we're going to lose a large part of infertile desert land! Let's just kill the Jews who come here, despite their great suffereing in recent times. After all, they lost 6 million people, but we don't want to lose a bit of land."
British subjects in Palestine? the Brits come in for 20 yrs with their army and all the Palestineans are "British" really? So why weren't these "British subjects" given the right to move to Britian? maybe because they were Palestieans...

What did they have to complain about? How about fighting for independence and seeing their hopes for a country being given to given away to immigrants.

Really palestine was British territory, so i'd be the british compensating for the holocaust. Also there was a plan to establish a jewish state before wwII even started. After the Ottoman empire collapsed it's territory was split up among the allied nations, palestine and Iraq to britain, Syria to France etc. the whole problem stems from the whole "spoils of war" custom back in the early 1900s. The original British plan was to have a jewish and Arab state, both equal in power and self-rule. Trouble is the Jews living in europe absolutely stampeded to the new state and began to organize, creating terrorist groups, even private underground armies. The British didn't want to hold on to that hot-potato so they pulled out and never called again...


If you read the terms of the mandate, you would note that it is not "British territory" as such.

Really palestine was British territory, so i'd be the british compensating for the holocaust. Also there was a plan to establish a jewish state before wwII even started. After the Ottoman empire collapsed it's territory was split up among the allied nations, palestine and Iraq to britain, Syria to France etc. the whole problem stems from the whole "spoils of war" custom back in the early 1900s. The original British plan was to have a jewish and Arab state, both equal in power and self-rule. Trouble is the Jews living in europe absolutely stampeded to the new state and began to organize, creating terrorist groups, even private underground armies. The British didn't want to hold on to that hot-potato so they pulled out and never called again...

It was British run but not British.

Spoils of war custom-true that's why under International law it is illegal to annex land gained by war-Israel has no legal right to be in the west bank or gaza, the settlements have to go.

Hot potato-absolutely they saw the problem they created, Israeli terrorists hastened their departure

I recall reading a quote by Jack Straw admitting that British politicians had screwed up badly with the Balfour Declaration and all that went on at the time.

I like way the muslims get stick for objecting to their chief holy man being mocked, but you can't even look at the word "Palestinian" without getting in a hissy fit....

I think by saying "objecting" you'd be doing a great disservice to the employees of the various embassies that were torched and rioted upon throughout the course of the cartoon controversy. Stop whitewashing Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism, it's nauseating. "Objecting would be using a political forum or media forum to express condemnation for actions, not inciting riots throughout the Muslim world on western emabassies amongst other venues. That behavior is despicable and you calling it "objecting" is truly a wonder to me. Let go of that PC crap and realize that while there are peaceful Muslims, not all Muslims are peaceful and that Islamic terrorism and fascism is fast on the rise throughout the world. Wake up, for all our sakes.

And how much land was that, as a percentage of the Area of the Mandate?

Or in Acres/Dunums? I'll give you a margin of error of 50,000 without contradicting you....can't get fairer than that......

By the way, are you more comfortable discussing what happened in 1948 than whats happening now as per the OP?

The land allocated to the Jews for the mandate encompassed the coastal strip where there were large Jewish communites and part of the north as well. The Negev desert was also allocated to the Jews because the large mostly vacant landamass was meant to accomadate Jewish immigration post Holocaust. You see, the idea was coexistence...two states side by side. There were Arab communities in what would have been Israel and Jewish communites and areas that were going to be part of the Palestinian state. They would have had the choice to live in either place. Yet all that was smashed to smitherins when the Arabs armies invaded and tried to kill the Jews. The subsequent annexation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip by Jordan and Egypt resepctively also didnt help the Pals.


I am comfortable discussing anything about this topic. As far as the OP, the Pals don't want to put their weapons down and sit down to the table and continue to fund terrorism and rocket launches from Gaza. The idea of being a peace partner doesn't include being given full autonomy in Gaza and then returning the sign of good faith by launching barrage after barrage of rockets into Israel. Until the Pals stop the terrorism, recognize Israel, and release Gilad Shalit, talking to them shouldn't even be on the table.

They never learn.

Really palestine was British territory, so i'd be the british compensating for the holocaust. Also there was a plan to establish a jewish state before wwII even started. After the Ottoman empire collapsed it's territory was split up among the allied nations, palestine and Iraq to britain, Syria to France etc. the whole problem stems from the whole "spoils of war" custom back in the early 1900s. The original British plan was to have a jewish and Arab state, both equal in power and self-rule. Trouble is the Jews living in europe absolutely stampeded to the new state and began to organize, creating terrorist groups, even private underground armies. The British didn't want to hold on to that hot-potato so they pulled out and never called again...


Firstly, the Jewish immigrants weren't really welcome anywhere else in the world, especially not where their homes were, and the prospects of a Jewish State were looking up so it was the logical destination for most Holocaust survivors.

As far as terrorist groups you must be speaking of the Irgun, a small fringe movement that was largely condemned by all leading Jewish authorities at the time inlcuding the Haganah.

"private underground armies" must be referring to the Haganah, which was actually a Jewish defensive force that was much needed because of hostile Arabs in many areas. The Jews learned their lesson from the riots and Jew massacres throughout the course of the early 20th century. The Grand Mufti's influence didn't help the situation either.

Does a lack of response mean I win?

think by saying "objecting" you'd be doing a great disservice to the employees of the various embassies that were torched and rioted upon throughout the course of the cartoon controversy.

And that makes your refusal to consider an article because a cartoon contained the word "palestinian" better how, exactly............?

The land allocated to the Jews for the mandate encompassed the coastal strip where there were large Jewish communites and part of the north as well. The Negev desert was also allocated to the Jews because the large mostly vacant landamass was meant to accomadate Jewish immigration post Holocaust. You see, the idea was coexistence...two states side by side. There were Arab communities in what would have been Israel and Jewish communites and areas that were going to be part of the Palestinian state. They would have had the choice to live in either place. Yet all that was smashed to smitherins when the Arabs armies invaded and tried to kill the Jews. The subsequent annexation of the West Bank and Gaza Strip by Jordan and Egypt resepctively also didnt help the Pals.
.

Thats nice. However the question of how much land was owned in acres/dunums was in response to the statement "If you weren't aware, all land that was Jewish prior to '48 was bought and owned by Jews, not stolen or part of any "theft."


I am comfortable discussing anything about this topic. As far as the OP, the Pals don't want to put their weapons down and sit down to the table and continue to fund terrorism and rocket launches from Gaza. The idea of being a peace partner doesn't include being given full autonomy in Gaza and then returning the sign of good faith by launching barrage after barrage of rockets into Israel. Until the Pals stop the terrorism, recognize Israel, and release Gilad Shalit, talking to them shouldn't even be on the table.

The OP was about the expansion of illegal settlements outside Israels borders, not hugging and kissing Hamas.

Firstly, the Jewish immigrants weren't really welcome anywhere else in the world, especially not where their homes were, and the prospects of a Jewish State were looking up so it was the logical destination for most Holocaust survivors.

As far as terrorist groups you must be speaking of the Irgun, a small fringe movement that was largely condemned by all leading Jewish authorities at the time inlcuding the Haganah.

"private underground armies" must be referring to the Haganah, which was actually a Jewish defensive force that was much needed because of hostile Arabs in many areas. The Jews learned their lesson from the riots and Jew massacres throughout the course of the early 20th century. The Grand Mufti's influence didn't help the situation either.

What happened in WW2 is horrendous but there is no justification for taking another peoples country and destroying their dreams for an independent nation which they had fought for.

Irgun condemned by all jewish authorities? one and I believe two former Irgun members becam PM did they not? Begin and I can't recall the other(may look it up)

Did not Sharon lead an IDF force to drive Palestineans out of their homes by tossing bombs in them?

.
As far as terrorist groups you must be speaking of the Irgun, a small fringe movement that was largely condemned by all leading Jewish authorities at the time inlcuding the Haganah.

"private underground armies" must be referring to the Haganah, which was actually a Jewish defensive force that was much needed because of hostile Arabs in many areas. The Jews learned their lesson from the riots and Jew massacres throughout the course of the early 20th century. The Grand Mufti's influence didn't help the situation either.

You left out the Lehi/stern gang grouping. You omit that despite condemnations there existed a great degree of co-operation between the Irgun and Hagannah, particularily between 1946 and 1948, including joint participation in Deir Yassin. There were also massacres and reprisals instituted by the Hagannah.

By the way, isnt there a government decoration available for members of the Lehi?

When Israel is refusing to deal with "terrorists" does it not strike you as Ironic that Menachem Begin was a member of the Irgun?

You left out the Lehi/stern gang grouping. You omit that despite condemnations there existed a great degree of co-operation between the Irgun and Hagannah, particularily between 1946 and 1948, including joint participation in Deir Yassin. There were also massacres and reprisals instituted by the Hagannah.

By the way, isnt there a government decoration available for members of the Lehi?

When Israel is refusing to deal with "terrorists" does it not strike you as Ironic that Menachem Begin was a member of the Irgun?

No not really, the Arabs kept preventing us from making anything close to a homeland, and the Arab leaders would keep oppressing us and massacare us.

So as usual, the Arabs instigated the violence.

I'm just glad that we're building settlements in OUR land again. =)

Spoils of war custom-true that's why under International law it is illegal to annex land gained by war.

Actually, it is legal to annex land as long as it is part of a peace treaty at the conclusion of a defensive war. You cannot annex land as part of an offensive war, however.

No not really, the Arabs kept preventing us from making anything close to a homeland, and the Arab leaders would keep oppressing us and massacare us.

So as usual, the Arabs instigated the violence.

I'm just glad that we're building settlements in OUR land again. =)

None of which responds to the points raised. What did Count Bernadotte have to do with "Arabs" btw?

Begoner21;11647360']Actually, it is legal to annex land as long as it is part of a peace treaty at the conclusion of a defensive war. You cannot annex land as part of an offensive war, however.

Yes you can...its not as legal, but if noone objects then the land is yours just as much.

After all, if Empire did as told..it would be a very boring history. Safe...but boring.

Yes you can...its not as legal, but if noone objects then the land is yours just as much.

After all, if Empire did as told..it would be a very boring history. Safe...but boring.

But they do object. Or do you think the bombs and shootings are just a "cute" local way of saying "hello"?

None of which responds to the points raised. What did Count Bernadotte have to do with "Arabs" btw?

His partition plan seemed to favor them, as the Lehi felt the Jews were being left out, I guess they felt assassination was the only way to stop him.

Either that or they just didn't like him for some other reason.

But they do object. Or do you think the bombs and shootings are just a "cute" local way of saying "hello"?

I meant the other nations not the invaded nation. Plus what better way to make an impression then fireworks? =)

His partition plan seemed to favor them, as the Lehi felt the Jews were being left out, I guess they felt assassination was the only way to stop him.

Either that or they just didn't like him for some other reason.

So your post which referenced Arab leaders and Arab violence earlier was just crap and in fact they just bump off whoever they think needs a bumping? Ok then.

I meant the other nations not the invaded nation. Plus what better way to make an impression then fireworks? =)

O yes..fuck them...they lost, after all.

Why didnt they think that way for those people in that country in 1939?

So your post which referenced Arab leaders and Arab violence earlier was just crap and in fact they just bump off whoever they think needs a bumping? Ok then.

1. Of course my earlier post was crap, because after all the Arabs are angels who have never meant the Jews any harm. Like OMG how did I ever live without you?

2. His partition plan alone is warrant enough to kill him during a sort of civil war. So his bumping was indeed justified using terms of the day.

O yes..fuck them...they lost, after all.

Why didnt they think that way for those people in that country in 1939?

1. Yes, fuck them, you can keep on fighting for your country until the bitter end and onwards, but if you can't get it back and your people are displace over time that's life.

2. They sorta did, but once Germany went into the countries people really started caring about, thats when it started to get more personal. Alliances in short.

1. Of course my earlier post was crap, because after all the Arabs are angels who have never meant the Jews any harm. Like OMG how did I ever live without you?

2. His partition plan alone is warrant enough to kill him during a sort of civil war. So his bumping was indeed justified using terms of the day.


Nobody disputes Arab violence and its unjustifiable excesses, however your post seemed to intimate that all Zionist/settler activity was targeted in response to this, which is entirely untrue. Likewise it shows the double standard in refusing to negotiate today with various Palestinian factions, consdering the considerable ruthlessness of the founders of the Israeli state.


1. Yes, fuck them, you can keep on fighting for your country until the bitter end and onwards, but if you can't get it back and your people are displace over time that's life..

Great thinking! Now the Romans sacked Jerusalem in what...70AD?......(My crystal ball tells me theres a "but thats different" on the way)

Nobody disputes Arab violence and its unjustifiable excesses, however your post seemed to intimate that all Zionist/settler activity was targeted in response to this, which is entirely untrue. Likewise it shows the double standard in refusing to negotiate today with various Palestinian factions, consdering the considerable ruthlessness of the founders of the Israeli state.



Great thinking! Now the Romans sacked Jerusalem in what...70AD?......(My crystal ball tells me theres a "but thats different" on the way)

1. There was little to no terrorist activity by the Hagana &/or Irgun. So there is no double standard with negotiations. Negotiation problems can be put 99% on the Arabs first.

2. No there is no difference...after 2000 years of waiting, and asking governments we finally got our homeland back. Why would there be a difference??

I meant the other nations not the invaded nation. Plus what better way to make an impression then fireworks? =)

zyclon b.

you and that racist attitide are a disgrace to your people and what your grandparents went through.

1. There was little to no terrorist activity by the Hagana &/or Irgun. So there is no double standard with negotiations. Negotiation problems can be put 99% on the Arabs first.

2. No there is no difference...after 2000 years of waiting, and asking governments we finally got our homeland back. Why would there be a difference??

"little to no terrorist activity"?:rolleyes: a simple websearch will disprove that-sounds a bit like those who deny the holocaust

zyclon b.

you and that racist attitide are a disgrace to your people and what your grandparents went through.

No! You and your ignorance are a disgrace and the reason why my friends and family keep getting killed! I shall not allow idiocy like yours to prevail on these forums so long as I draw a breath and thensome.

"little to no terrorist activity"?:rolleyes: a simple websearch will disprove that-sounds a bit like those who deny the holocaust

Let's see...targeted Government Buildings & Military, plus killed Arab civilians in response to Arabs massacres of Jewish civilians. Unless you count the last one, there has been little to none terrorist activity. Of course I can't expext someone with the Alias of "Free Sex and Beer" to contemplate such a concept.

If the israelis can't behave like civilized people, they don't deserve a cent. Same for the palestinians. There is no excuse for what israel did to lebanon, and not a dime of aid should reach israel until the criminals responsible are in leg irons in the hague.

If the israelis can't behave like civilized people, they don't deserve a cent. Same for the palestinians. There is no excuse for what israel did to lebanon, and not a dime of aid should reach israel until the criminals responsible are in leg irons in the hague.

1. Your right. Too bad the Israelis behave like civilized people.
2. There is plenty of excuse. Hezbollah attacked and kidnapped two soldiers, this would've been averted had the UN & Lebanon diarmed Hezbollah as was required in the resolution originally.

And I do not want to wait for the Hezbollah terrorists to be in the hague until Israel gets its much deserved aid.

1. Your right. Too bad the Israelis behave like civilized people.
2. There is plenty of excuse. Hezbollah attacked and kidnapped two soldiers, this would've been averted had the UN & Lebanon diarmed Hezbollah as was required in the resolution originally.

And I do not want to wait for the Hezbollah terrorists to be in the hague until Israel gets its much deserved aid.

Where did israel bury the 1000 civilians that hezbollah killed indiscriminately?

Oh, wait...

No! You and your ignorance are a disgrace and the reason why my friends and family keep getting killed! I shall not allow idiocy like yours to prevail on these forums so long as I draw a breath and thensome.



Let's see...targeted Government Buildings & Military, plus killed Arab civilians in response to Arabs massacres of Jewish civilians. Unless you count the last one, there has been little to none terrorist activity. Of course I can't expext someone with the Alias of "Free Sex and Beer" to contemplate such a concept.

below a brief history of Ariel Sharons military record-I won't even go into what he did in Lebanon-you're no better than the holocaust deniers

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.

I was going to mention the palestinean children killed by Israeli snipers but you're right the little bastards probably deserved it for something an adult did.

Thats nice. However the question of how much land was owned in acres/dunums was in response to the statement "If you weren't aware, all land that was Jewish prior to '48 was bought and owned by Jews, not stolen or part of any "theft."


...I said if you were out 50,000 either side I wouldnt argue, and you still can't answer the question?