NationStates Jolt Archive

They just want to exist. Without the "co"s that were forced on them.

*cough* Bullshit *cough*

You and your government tried what? Except solidifying the conquest?

How about offering land in exchange for peace? That has been successful in the past.

What United Beleriand fail to understand is the simple fact that this land never belonged to the Palestinians. It was the Brits' and in 1947 the UN decided to give the land to the Jews. Never ever belonged to the Palestinians.I'm not discussing this over again. The land belongs to those who have lived on it for centuries. The Brits were only there to administer it on the Arabs' behalf for a short while after the end of Turkish rule there. Also the UN had no justification to decide anything over the heads of those who actually lived in the land in question. Neither Brits nor the UN had any rights to the land.

how so?

back up with links/documentation

Don't waste your time with someone advocating Genocide.

Oslo was an Israeli attempt to finally gain full control over Palestine. You call that a beginning? Of what? Apartheid? There would have been no concessions later. Oslo was no concession proposal, it was a take-over attempt.
I already gave you a definition.

It was an attempt to begin giving the Palestintians partial control over the West Bank. Once that happens it is not that hard to believe that this opening couldn't be used to gain more concessions from Israel. Instead Hamas decided to destroy the possibility of peace and then of course reactionaries in Israel allowed Hamas's violence for them to cancel the peace process. So both sides can be blamed. But Oslo itself very well could have led somewhere.

And you actually didn't. You mentioned that anyone who desires something that isn't theirs as "evil". I was wondering if you wanted to stand by that. Obviously we are all evil if this is true.

I'm not discussing this over again. The land belongs to those who have lived on it for centuries. The Brits were only there to administer it on the Arabs' behalf for a short while after the end of Turkish rule there. Also the UN had no justification to decide anything over the heads of those who actually lived in the land in question. Neither Brits nor the UN had any rights to the land.
What's your opinion on the colonisation of the Americas or Australia?

I'm not discussing this over again. The land belongs to those who have lived on it for centuries.

You mean the JEWS?

I'm not discussing this over again. The land belongs to those who have lived on it for centuries. The Brits were only there to administer it on the Arabs' behalf for a short while after the end of Turkish rule there. Also the UN had no justification to decide anything over the heads of those who actually lived in the land in question. Neither Brits nor the UN had any rights to the land.

intersting how the arab nations did'nt have a problem voting on the proposition at the UN. They only got huffy when they lost the vote.

How about offering land in exchange for peace? That has been successful in the past.There has been no such offer from Israel. You know that. And btw why should Palestinians offer anything for land that is already rightfully theirs? Get Israel out of the West Bank, draw back Israel to the Green Line today, and there will be peace tomorrow.

Guess what. JEWS COME FROM THE MIDDLE EAST. The only reason they are in Europe, Russia etc is because of the disporia earlier on.

A forced disporia at that. He does not understand that Jews come from the Middle East. He does not understand that Arabs are also occupying land as well.

*cough* Bullshit *cough*This is no bullshit, this is fact, you Arab-hating retard.

I'm not discussing this over again. The land belongs to those who have lived on it for centuries. The Brits were only there to administer it on the Arabs' behalf for a short while after the end of Turkish rule there. Also the UN had no justification to decide anything over the heads of those who actually lived in the land in question. Neither Brits nor the UN had any rights to the land.

The land itself was sparcely populated at the time the Brits gained control of it. And the Brits conquered the land from the Ottoman Empire, that makes it theirs to do as they wish. And what do you think the UN is for? To hammer out peace deals. The vast majority of the population in 1948, Jews and Arabs alike, were immigrants, dividing the land into two states was the best idea there was.

Why should they want to live with the foreign occupiers of their land? If someone breaks into your house and just settles down there, are you supposed to go into any compromises?

One can ask the same question to arabs as they are foreign occupiers of the land as well. Shall we ask them to leave and blow ourselves up to accomplish that?

A forced disporia at that. He does not understand that Jews come from the Middle East. He does not understand that Arabs are also occupying land as well.The word is diaspora. The Jews who came to Palestine in the 19th and 20th century are not those who left it 1900 years prior.
I know you hate Arabs and you have no problem to justify land grab by foreign intruders. So there is no point in listening to any of your infantile assumptions.

The land itself was sparcely populated at the time the Brits gained control of it. And the Brits conquered the land from the Ottoman Empire, that makes it theirs to do as they wish. And what do you think the UN is for? To hammer out peace deals. The vast majority of the population in 1948, Jews and Arabs alike, were immigrants, dividing the land into two states was the best idea there was.The claim for a Jewish state is a lot older than 1948, it even predates the Holocaust by at least 30 years. You have absolutely no idea. Read up on history.

Israelis are evil because they are foreigners, invaders, occupiers.

Arabs are evil because they are foreigners, invaders, occupiers

And even though Palestinians have already accepted the Green Line as a border,

They have? Seems to me Hamas did not get the messege.

the Jews still won't stop their occupation.

Maybe the Palestinians should stop blowing themselves up? If they did then maybe Israel will pull out like they did in the Gaza Strip.

There have never been any serious offers from Israel, so there is absolutely no reason for any compromises.

You keep repeating that mantra but yet you have offered no proof that it was a serious offer.

One can ask the same question to arabs as they are foreign occupiers of the land as well. Shall we ask them to leave and blow ourselves up to accomplish that?Arabs are not foreigners to Palestine. They are indigenous. Arabs are what all the various groups of Canaan, Ammon, Amurru, Hedjaz, etc etc (even Hebrews) have merged into. They are the original inhabitants of the land.

The claim for a Jewish state is a lot older than 1948, it even predates the Holocaust by at least 30 years. You have absolutely no idea. Read up on history.

You clearly missed my point. The Jewish claim is irrelavent. The majority of the population, Jews and Arabs alike were immigrants. As such, they all had claim to their new land. Dividing it up as the UN did was a very wise move and should have been accepted on all sides. But of course that didn't happen.

i nearly answered seriously.

you are joking right?:(

I was being serious. There are good points inside that post and yet you labeled him a troll. Why?

Arabs are not foreigners to Palestine. They are indigenous. Arabs are what all the various groups of Canaan, Ammon, Amurru, etc etc (even Hebrews) have merged into. They are the original inhabitants of the land.

Origional? These groups didn't chase out any people before them?

The word is diaspora. The Jews who came to Palestine in the 19th and 20th century are not those who left it 1900 years prior.
I know you hate Arabs and you have no problem to justify land grab by foreign intruders. So there is no point in listening to any of your infantile assumptions.

so where did those jews come from then? judaism isn't big on converts or forclibly converting people.

You'd be surprised but he later responded to me that he was dead serious. We can't help it if people are stupid right?

You are indeed right. We can't help it if people are stupid.

I was being serious. There are good points inside that post and yet you labeled him a troll. Why?

something along the lines of hitler was a great leader. Who else could have roasted the jews and gays, etc....

had he said hitler was persuasive/inspirational/etc.... fine

Also he made one post that would annoy people and left the thread.

seems like a troll to me,

could be wrong though. still a twat though

Israelites ceased to exist almost 2600 years ago.

I call bullshit.

i completely understand the point of view coming...i am not a muslim- i am a catholic but i am arabic and i am not very fond of israel. However, I do not think the NAzi regime and the Israeli "government" canb e compared. One, they were in different time periods. Second, the Nazis had the Gestapo and also terrorised the people. If you were not a Nazi you had to pretend to beone. Israel, yes, is miltaristic, and yes, they kill people but we fail to recognise that they feel as if the Palestinians started the fight because their PM was assasainted [SP?] and believe it was Palestine. This is a much different situation because it is a conflict of Religion. I strongly disagree w/ the Jewish and Muslim point of view in Southwest Asia. YOu hate each other, yet you worship the same God. We (Christians, Jews, and Muslims) should join together to strengthen our beliefs and spead our message across the world. Do you not notice that while people have a negative view of either Christains, Jews, or Muslims, Buddhists are not looked upon as negatively, as are Shintoists or even Hindus. So, I think they are totally different but the Nazis were worse. However, i strongly disagree, do not condone, and oppose both the position of Israel, how Israel got the land in the first place, and their warmongering ways.

You use the word "evil" quite easily. Calling a group of people this is a dangerous move not to mention foolish. And no matter what examples you try to use, there are others that could be used where the Palestinians had an offer and turned it down flat. You simply cannot blame one party for the problem there.

Here. Here.

Egypt? Returning the Sinai to Egypt obviously doesn't keep Israel from further occupation of the Wes Bank, does it?

Now its apples and oranges. Jeez. Some people have no clue as to how diplomacy works. Sinaii is and has been Egyptian territory. It was taken during the 67 war. It was returned to Egypt because it fully belonged to them. Do you understand this now or are you going to be ignorant in diplomacy matters?

o and allegheny w/e u should get ur facts straight u dontkno what ur talkin bout so be sayin shit bout arabs when ur people stole the land in the first place.

Neither Syrians nor Jordanians ever flocked to a foreign land with the purpose to set up a state.

No. They just moved into the region that is now Syria and Jordan and moving or killing people that were already there. Now what's your next argument?

o and allegheny w/e u should get ur facts straight u dontkno what ur talkin bout so be sayin shit bout arabs when ur people stole the land in the first place.

your skills in arguement astound me. :rolleyes:

but jordan conquered and occupied 31% of arab palestine, (which they lost in the following war to israel)

syrian occupation of lebannon?

That's showing him. Well done Cullons. You have officially owned him.

What United Beleriand fail to understand is the simple fact that this land never belonged to the Palestinians. It was the Brits' and in 1947 the UN decided to give the land to the Jews. Never ever belonged to the Palestinians.

It was not even British land, nor the turks nor anyone else who owned it before them. The people with true claims to the land are the Cananites and they are all dead.

That's showing him. Well done Cullons. You have officially owned him.

:fluffle:

don't really want him though.

anyone want to buy him of me?

(ub joking ofcourse)

Oslo was an Israeli attempt to finally gain full control over Palestine.

Giving up all of Gaza and 95% of the West Bank is full control over Palestine? Oh brother. Now I know you are ignorant.

There has been no such offer from Israel.

Sinaii in 1979 ring a bell? All of Gaza and 95% of the West Bank in 2000 ring a bell? Seems like they have offered to GIVE LAND BACK in the past and Egypt accepted it. Of course, Sadat got assassinated for it by an extremist. The PA rejected the Oslo accords that offered up nearly everything they wanted. Now tell me again why you are saying Israel never made offers of giving land back?

You know that. And btw why should Palestinians offer anything for land that is already rightfully theirs? Get Israel out of the West Bank, draw back Israel to the Green Line today, and there will be peace tomorrow.

Wanna bet?

Hmmm, I wonder why I even bother argue with someone over my own existance... I exist, I'm here, I'm gonna stay here...
Tough that someone as intelligent as United Beleriand think that the world goes by his ideal....

You know what, call me when you'll ascend a higher level of existance and have your armies of the faithfull upon the unjust and unruly humans of this world.... and than call me when you'll have no one else to argue with after your just crusade against evil (what you define as evil) killed all humanity

(why call me when every human will be dead, I don't know, I think he'll keep me alive to prove me wrong)

I'd have to say you're the most inebriated person I've ever seen on NSG. Congratulations.

But anyway, what ever that meens as long as it makes you happy, I am happy - thanks, dude :)

This is no bullshit, this is fact, you Arab-hating retard.

I see I struck a nerve. Newsflash: the only hater around here is you. Do you call anyone who disagrees with you an Arab-hating retard?

BTW: such names shows you cannot control your temper. Under normal rules of debate, you would have already lost with name calling like that.

The word is diaspora. The Jews who came to Palestine in the 19th and 20th century are not those who left it 1900 years prior.

I call bullshit again. Prove it.

I know you hate Arabs and you have no problem to justify land grab by foreign intruders. So there is no point in listening to any of your infantile assumptions.

I hate arabs because I disagree with what you are saying? Is that your definition of racism?

Read up on history.

That's rich coming from you.

Arabs are not foreigners to Palestine.

Bullshit they aren't. There were not even arabs till around the 5c B.C. give or take. Israel has been there a hell of a lot longer than that. So tell me, who precisely are the foreigners in the land.

They are indigenous.

Yea right :rolleyes:

Arabs are what all the various groups of Canaan, Ammon, Amurru, Hedjaz, etc etc (even Hebrews) have merged into. They are the original inhabitants of the land.

Wrong all over the place. Read up on History.

You clearly missed my point. The Jewish claim is irrelavent. The majority of the population, Jews and Arabs alike were immigrants. As such, they all had claim to their new land. Dividing it up as the UN did was a very wise move and should have been accepted on all sides. But of course that didn't happen.

And he tells us to read up on history :rolleyes:

Sinaii in 1979 ring a bell? All of Gaza and 95% of the West Bank in 2000 ring a bell? Seems like they have offered to GIVE LAND BACK in the past and Egypt accepted it. Of course, Sadat got assassinated for it by an extremist. The PA rejected the Oslo accords that offered up nearly everything they wanted. Now tell me again why you are saying Israel never made offers of giving land back?The Oslo proposal would have meant the annexation of Gaza and the West Bank by Israel without giving its inhabitants sovereignty, voting rights, or even control of sufficient infrastructure. I don't call that an offer.

o and allegheny w/e u should get ur facts straight u dontkno what ur talkin bout so be sayin shit bout arabs when ur people stole the land in the first place.

1) I'm not Jewish

2) I'm not an Israeli

3) I do not live in the region

4) I do know what I am talking about in this matter.

5) You are right that they stole the land first. Back when they left Egypt and drove out the Cananites.

6) Do I have to go back and give a history lesson of the region to you about this conflict? Who started what to whom is a matter of opinion.

7) As for land stealing, People are claiming that Israel stole the land. Not denying they did when they left Egypt. However, there have been other occupants of the region after Israel. I could go on and on about them but no one who is against Israel will listen to them because they see the Palestinians as the original inhabitants when in fact they are not.

8) Still think I do not know what I am talking about telegram my nation and I will freely discuss this issue in a civilized matter over AIM, Yahoo, or MSN messenger. Your choice.

The Oslo proposal would have meant the annexation of Gaza and the West Bank by Israel without giving its inhabitants sovereignty, voting rights, or even control of sufficient infrastructure. I don't call that an offer.

And yet no counter proposal. Also stop to think that it would have eventually happened? Diplomacy happens in small steps. The nation of Palestine would not be able to handle security matters over night or defend themselves over night. They would be able to eventually but it takes awhile for it to happen. You really have no clue on how diplomacy works do you?

1) I'm not Jewish

2) I'm not an Israeli

3) I do not live in the region

4) I do know what I am talking about in this matter.

5) You are right that they stole the land first. Back when they left Egypt and drove out the Cananites.

6) Do I have to go back and give a history lesson of the region to you about this conflict? Who started what to whom is a matter of opinion.

7) As for land stealing, People are claiming that Israel stole the land. Not denying they did when they left Egypt. However, there have been other occupants of the region after Israel. I could go on and on about them but no one who is against Israel will listen to them because they see the Palestinians as the original inhabitants when in fact they are not.

8) Still think I do not know what I am talking about telegram my nation and I will freely discuss this issue in a civilized matter over AIM, Yahoo, or MSN messenger. Your choice.I suppose you're just one little evangelical Christian who believes all the bs the Bible is telling. You can't even distinguish Israelites from Jews or Israelis. How old are you? 18?

And yet no counter proposal. Also stop to think that it would have eventually happened? Diplomacy happens in small steps. The nation of Palestine would not be able to handle security matters over night or defend themselves over night. They would be able to eventually but it takes awhile for it to happen. You really have no clue on how diplomacy works do you?Yes I do. In this case Israel would have just annexed Gaza and the West Bank, period. Thus implementing an apartheid state. But Arafat just didn't go into the trap that Barak had set up for him.
As I said, Rabin was killed for his small attempt of some peace. And all subsequent Israeli elections show that Israel has no interest in peace with the Palestinians, or in the Palestinians' fate at all. They just wish them away or behind high walls.

I suppose you're just one little evangelical Christian who believes all the bs the Bible is telling.

I'm glad you think that the bible is BS. So I guess the Babylonian King's dream (interpreted by Daniel in the Bible) proved to be BS? After all, Daniel predicted that there would be four kingdoms, one weaker than the other that would take down the Babylonian Empire. This would be the Medes/Persian Empire (proven to be an Historical fact), the Greek Empire (historical fact) and the Roman Empire (fact.) It was also stated that the last empire would be divided (Another fact). Yes I am an Evangelical Christian (of the Methodist denomination) and I do believe in the Bible. So there I would agree with you.

You can't even distinguish Israelites from Jews or Israelis. How old are you? 18?

Yes I can for legally, they are one and the same. As to my age, that is really none of your business. You did not tell me how old you are so why should I tell you how old I am?

Yes I do. In this case Israel would have just annexed Gaza and the West Bank, period.

You have no proof of said annexation. So I would stop making baseless claims based on facts that are not in evidence.

Yes I am an Evangelical Christian and I do believe in the Bible.

Aren't you late for church, then spotty?

Aren't you late for church, then spotty?

Nope. Already had church early this morning.

Damn.

Yes I am an Evangelical Christian and I do believe in the Bible.So that concludes it. Since you live in a fictional parallel universe there is no point in talking to you about the real world. Have a nice life, and stay on your side of the Atlantic.

So that concludes it. Since you live in a fictional parallel universe there is no point in talking to you about the real world.

HAHAHAHA!! Now that's funny has hell since I do not live in a fictional world when it comes to historical evidence. I told you before that the Cananites were there first. Arabs did not descend from them for they were literally wiped out by the Israelites. The Israelites were conquered by several people and then freed themselves from said conquerors. I could point out many regimes that controled the area. However, it is you that is failing to recognize what is being said. Heck, I'm not even using the Bible in this debate.

HAHAHAHA!! Now that's funny has hell since I do not live in a fictional world when it comes to historical evidence. I told you before that the Cananites were there first. Arabs did not descend from them for they were literally wiped out by the Israelites. The Israelites were conquered by several people and then freed themselves from said conquerors. I could point out many regimes that controled the area. However, it is you that is failing to recognize what is being said. Heck, I'm not even using the Bible in this debate.You just do. Over and out. :sniper:

You just do. Over and out. :sniper:

Nice job with the gun smiley. I have not used the Bible in this debate at all. No where did I quote bible verses in here at all. All I used was historical fact that the Jews and Arabs were not there first.

UB:

I want you to answer this question!

Do you want the Jews to leave the Middle East by any means necessary?

HAHAHAHA!! Now that's funny has hell since I do not live in a fictional world when it comes to historical evidence. I told you before that the Cananites were there first. Arabs did not descend from them for they were literally wiped out by the Israelites. The Israelites were conquered by several people and then freed themselves from said conquerors. I could point out many regimes that controled the area. However, it is you that is failing to recognize what is being said. Heck, I'm not even using the Bible in this debate.

Hmm, it would seem then that you've effectively cleared up the pivotal question this thread is all about. The Nazis might've tried for genocide, but evidently they couldn't hold a candle to the efforts of the old Israelites - "literally wiped out", you say?

We have a winner, folks - Israel, by a nose.

Hmm, it would seem then that you've effectively cleared up the pivotal question this thread is all about. The Nazis might've tried for genocide, but evidently they couldn't hold a candle to the efforts of the old Israelites - "literally wiped out", you say?

We have a winner, folks - Israel, by a nose.

In case you did not know it, but everyone did that back in those days. And those they did not kill, they used them as slave labor. We could say that the Romans were worse than both Hitler and Israel combined.

Ok so I don't like Israel, I'll admit that. It angers me that because the US supports them they feel as if they can flaunt their power around, and do whatever they want. If Iran acted in the manner Israel did, there would be an international outrage, but because Israel has USA backing, they can do pretty much whatever they want? Are they as bad as the Nazi's though? NOT EVEN CLOSE, I'm just going to take a guess, analyze some point of view, and say the guy that wrote that was Islamic, so from his point of view, yes the Israelis are worse, but from a global standpoint, no certainly not.


:eek: :sniper:

HAHAHAHA!! Now that's funny has hell since I do not live in a fictional world when it comes to historical evidence. I told you before that the Cananites were there first. Arabs did not descend from them for they were literally wiped out by the Israelites. The Israelites were conquered by several people and then freed themselves from said conquerors. I could point out many regimes that controled the area. However, it is you that is failing to recognize what is being said. Heck, I'm not even using the Bible in this debate.


You call it a debate? You dont debate at all! :D No one in here is having a debate at all.
Its the most borring selfrightess word wobbuling, I have been witnessing, for a good long time! Haha
You guyess know precisely dick about reality, and you even manneged to sacrifaci your only true possibilities to touch it, all along the way.... and its so easy?

In case you did not know it, but everyone did that back in those days. And those they did not kill, they used them as slave labor. We could say that the Romans were worse than both Hitler and Israel combined.

But that wasn't the question. It was whether Israel or the Nazis were worse; you've answered that question. Genocidal bastards!

Ok so I don't like Israel, I'll admit that. It angers me that because the US supports them they feel as if they can flaunt their power around, and do whatever they want. If Iran acted in the manner Israel did, there would be an international outrage, but because Israel has USA backing, they can do pretty much whatever they want? Are they as bad as the Nazi's though? NOT EVEN CLOSE, I'm just going to take a guess, analyze some point of view, and say the guy that wrote that was Islamic, so from his point of view, yes the Israelis are worse, but from a global standpoint, no certainly not.

It is nice to see that one person can get passed something that they do not like and see that Hitler was far worse than Israel. It is a refreshing change and for that I thank you :)

But that wasn't the question. It was whether Israel or the Nazis were worse; you've answered that question. Genocidal bastards!

Name me a kingdom/empire that did not engage in genocide back in those days.

Name me a kingdom/empire that did not engage in genocide back in those days.

Again, that's not the question of this thread - if you really want me to engage me on this, I suggest you start a new one.

Thanks for playing, we'll be back after these messages.

It is nice to see that one person can get passed something that they do not like and see that Hitler was far worse than Israel. It is a refreshing change and for that I thank you :)

Thank you very much!

Btw if you really think about it, every nation in the world is guilty of genocide, if you idly stand by (as is most of the "First World" right now) and watch genocide occur, are you not just as guilty those perpertrating it?

"We are not so much harmed by the words of our enemies, as the silence of our friends"
~MLK~

Again, that's not the question of this thread - if you really want me to engage me on this, I suggest you start a new one.

Thanks for playing, we'll be back after these messages.

And we're back.

The thing is though, you have to put things into historical perspective when you are talking about the past. Especially that far back. Failing to do so shows that one wants to ignore all of history except for those that supports your POV. In this case though, we are talking about the State of Israel as it is today compared to Hitler's Germany. That is the real question here Dobbsworld.

Thank you very much!

You are most welcome and welcome to the boards.

Btw if you really think about it, every nation in the world is guilty of genocide, if you idly stand by (as is most of the "First World" right now) and watch genocide occur, are you not just as guilty those perpertrating it?

Yep. That is how I look at it.

"We are not so much harmed by the words of our enemies, as the silence of our friends"
~MLK~

A wise man he was indeed. A shame that his life was cut short. :(

And we're back.

The thing is though, you have to put things into historical perspective when you are talking about the past. Especially that far back. Failing to do so shows that one wants to ignore all of history except for those that supports your POV. In this case though, we are talking about the State of Israel as it is today compared to Hitler's Germany. That is the real question here Dobbsworld.

I don't hand out passcards on the basis of crimes against humanity having happened a long, long time ago. That's what the wannabe-Nazis of today would have you do in their case, and I don't see how Israel (or the Israelites, seeing as you're insisting on the two being one and the same) can get away from it, either.

The Nazis tried to perpetrate genocide. The Israelites succeeded. By your own arguments here in this thread (not mine), clearly - Israel is far more odious than Nazi Germany.

I don't hand out passcards on the basis of crimes against humanity having happened a long, long time ago.

It was an accepted practice back then. In today's way of thinking, what occured in the past is very horrific. It was back then too but it was accepted back then and remained so up to the time of the Nazis.

Again dobbs, the question does not deal with ancient history but history over the last 60+ years from Hitler's regime to today's time.

It was an accepted practice back then.

According to whom? The Israelites? You? The baby Jesus?

In today's way of thinking, what occured in the past is very horrific. It was back then too but it was accepted back then and remained so up to the time of the Nazis.

Who was it accepted by? Clarify, please.

Again dobbs, the question does not deal with ancient history but history over the last 60+ years from Hitler's regime to today's time.

Then you shouldn't needlessly bring up the genocide the Israelites carried out against their neighbours, then should you? Rather weakens the case against the Nazis being worse, don't you think?

And let me just say once again for the record that I think it's a lazy disgrace to blithely assume there's some sort of inherent difference in the human condition that oh-so luckily happens to support your argument, AC. At no time has genocide ever been anything other than horrific, and your ready willingness to consign human suffering and grief to a forgotten corner of the human experience is frankly, reprehensible.

I don't hand out passcards on the basis of crimes against humanity having happened a long, long time ago. That's what the wannabe-Nazis of today would have you do in their case, and I don't see how Israel (or the Israelites, seeing as you're insisting on the two being one and the same) can get away from it, either.

The Nazis tried to perpetrate genocide. The Israelites succeeded. By your own arguments here in this thread (not mine), clearly - Israel is far more odious than Nazi Germany.The ancient Israelites only succeeded partially. Just as did the European Jews who came to Palestine to make their state and to supplant the original population with their own offspring.

. And the Brits conquered the land from the Ottoman Empire, that makes it theirs to do as they wish. .

Not according to the terms of the Mandate, no.

.
The PA rejected the Oslo accords that offered up nearly everything they wanted. .

The Oslo accords broke down, the PA did not reject them. Some blame Palestinian violence, others point to the increased settlement building as a provocation which caused it. You can take your pick.

.
There were not even arabs till around the 5c B.C. give or take. .

Think again on that one.

.
I'm glad you think that the bible is BS. .

So am I. It means hes not entirely a hopeless case.

.
I told you before that the Cananites were there first. Arabs did not descend from them for they were literally wiped out by the Israelites..

If you mean 'literal' in the 'all dead' sense, I've bad news for you.

http://www.geocities.com/soho/lofts/2938/histcult.html#ph3

So am I. It means hes not entirely a hopeless case.Unlike AC2 who does believe in the Bible.

You can't compare the two, they were from different time periods, it's like saying, who's worse, the Huns or the Albanians? Nazis don't have a countrym therefor you can't compare them in this time period.

It was an accepted practice back then. In today's way of thinking, what occured in the past is very horrific. It was back then too but it was accepted back then and remained so up to the time of the Nazis.

Again dobbs, the question does not deal with ancient history but history over the last 60+ years from Hitler's regime to today's time.

Genocide is still an accepted practice, ever heard of a little place called Sudan? Oh the world is so horrified, the US is so horrified! Thats why President Bush has personally vetoed 3 relief bills concerning Africa and that specific region. As I said earlier ever nation is guilty of genocide, or at the bare minimum attempted genocide/ crimes against humanity. Which therefore makes every nation hypocritical, we act abashed and horrified, yet we commit the same crimes. Personally when in reference to the 20th and 21st centuries I believe the Nazi's to be worse though.

Genocide is still an accepted practice, ever heard of a little place called Sudan? Oh the world is so horrified, the US is so horrified! Thats why President Bush has personally vetoed 3 relief bills concerning Africa and that specific region. As I said earlier ever nation is guilty of genocide, or at the bare minimum attempted genocide/ crimes against humanity. Which therefore makes every nation hypocritical, we act abashed and horrified, yet we commit the same crimes. Personally when in reference to the 20th and 21st centuries I believe the Nazi's to be worse though.

No,genocide isn't an accepted practice,it's a savage and barbaric act.
And I don't think there's anyway on hell,heaven or Earth that you can prove your "every nation guilty of genocide" idea.Mainly because it isn't true.

No,genocide isn't an accepted practice,it's a savage and barbaric act.
And I don't think there's anyway on hell,heaven or Earth that you can prove your "every nation guilty of genocide" idea.Mainly because it isn't true.

Thats a great argument, it isnt true. Thats an idiotic statement, do I have any proof? no, I said it though, so it must be true. :-p Name one country any time period that has in some way not been responsible for a crime against humanity. Liechtenstien? They launder money for organized crime, and weapons dealers all over the world. Name just one. You are exactly right its savage and barbaric, but if it isnt accepted, why does it still occur? What its not savage and barbaric enough for us to do anything about it? Just savage enough for us to get on our pedestals and scream, and do nothing else but scream?

Want to provide some real arguement now?

Thats a great argument, it isnt true. Thats an idiotic statement, do I have any proof? no, I said it though, so it must be true. :-p Name one country any time period that has in some way not been responsible for a crime against humanity. Liechtenstien? They launder money for organized crime, and weapons dealers all over the world. Name just one. You are exactly right its savage and barbaric, but if it isnt accepted, why does it still occur? What its not savage and barbaric enough for us to do anything about it? Just savage enough for us to get on our pedestals and scream, and do nothing else but scream?

Want to provide some real arguement now?

is it accepted? no- not officially by the US at least.

is it practiced? yes. Since when has any nation in the world connected what is virtuous with what is done?

http://www.geocities.com/soho/lofts/2938/histcult.html#ph3

interst site.
biased in quite a few regards though.
Quite a few points that are made or just suppositions while other parts are biased. but not to bad

The Oslo accords broke down, the PA did not reject them. Some blame Palestinian violence, others point to the increased settlement building as a provocation which caused it. You can take your pick.

I blame arafat over anything else who walked away from the best offer the Israelis have ever offered. By walking away, he did indeed reject the offer. It was shortly there after that the 2nd Intifada was launched.

I blame arafat over .....

Oddly enough, I sort of guessed that without you telling me.

Unlike AC2 who does believe in the Bible.

Now that's a personal attack. Why don't you IM me using one of the various methods like AIM, Yahoo, or MSN. Maybe if we talk about something other than this, you be surprised at just how level headed I am.

The problem here is that people do not want to see past their biasness and actually listen to what is being said. That goes for both sides in this debate.

Genocide is still an accepted practice, ever heard of a little place called Sudan?

Yes I have heard of it. A shame that no one is stepping up to take care of the problem. I know that the UN is trying to do something but it is moving way to slow.

Oh the world is so horrified, the US is so horrified! Thats why President Bush has personally vetoed 3 relief bills concerning Africa and that specific region.

And these relief bills came from where?

As I said earlier ever nation is guilty of genocide, or at the bare minimum attempted genocide/ crimes against humanity. Which therefore makes every nation hypocritical, we act abashed and horrified, yet we commit the same crimes. Personally when in reference to the 20th and 21st centuries I believe the Nazi's to be worse though.

So much for the Genocide Treaty.

Thats a great argument, it isnt true. Thats an idiotic statement, do I have any proof? no, I said it though, so it must be true. :-p Name one country any time period that has in some way not been responsible for a crime against humanity. Liechtenstien? They launder money for organized crime, and weapons dealers all over the world. Name just one. You are exactly right its savage and barbaric, but if it isnt accepted, why does it still occur? What its not savage and barbaric enough for us to do anything about it? Just savage enough for us to get on our pedestals and scream, and do nothing else but scream?

Want to provide some real arguement now?

Belgium?
Lithuania?
Want to provide proof of your Liechtenstein comment?
If you don't provide proof on this forum,we all just laugh at your point and ignore you.

Oddly enough, I sort of guessed that without you telling me.

If he had offered a counter proposal, maybe we would have had a thing like diplomacy actually takeing place? He did not offer one. He just left the table.

Belgium?

Look at Africa.

Lithuania?

Look at how they assisted the Germans in hunting down Jews.

Want to provide proof of your Liechtenstein comment?

Agreed.

If you don't provide proof on this forum,we all just laugh at your point and ignore you.

Pretty much.

I blame arafat over anything else who walked away from the best offer the Israelis have ever offered. By walking away, he did indeed reject the offer. It was shortly there after that the 2nd Intifada was launched.The "offer" was UNACCEPTABLE. There was no way that Arafat could have just thrown away any Palestinian sovereignty for all time. Oslo would have meant the complete and final annexation of the West Bank and Gaza by Israel. Now cut the crap.

Both regimes carried out an occupation they deemed as just, but the international community did not. Both setup ghettos, roadblocks and curfews for the occupied, those who break curfew get shot in the street with tanks. Both were racist regimes who operate(d) with a sense of superiority. Both committed mass killings and slaughters including of women and children. Both used the holocaust as justification or propaganda for their actions. Both are hated by the international community and invaded their neighbours. And both are feircely militaristic.

Its a very close race but the Nazis haven't been around for 60 years and only lasted around 20. The regime of Israel is still around and has been for 60 years. Its close, but I say Israel takes this one. your thoughts?

You are an idiot.

Israel is a peaceful democracy that is only responding to aggressors. the Nazis attacked people without provocation and tortured them and killed them. How the hell can you even compare the two?

:upyours:
you son of a bitch

Look at Africa.

Their colonisation of the Congo was not done by force-they were given it at the Berlin conference back in the 19th Century.And they weren't nearly as bad as other nations in colonisation.

Look at how they assisted the Germans in hunting down Jews.

Point taken.

Agreed.

Huzzah!

Pretty much.

Fun,ain't it?

If he had offered a counter proposal, maybe we would have had a thing like diplomacy actually takeing place? He did not offer one. He just left the table.

No, that was 2000. Oslo is where they signed. Are you having another "no Arabs around...." moment?

The "offer" was UNACCEPTABLE.

Then why not negotiate instead of WALKING FROM THE TABLE?

There was no way that Arafat could have just thrown away any Palestinian sovereignty for all time.

Again, prove that it will be for all time! You have no proof that it would be for all time.

Oslo would have meant the complete and final annexation of the West Bank and Gaza by Israel. Now cut the crap.

Again, I'm calling Bullshit for you have no proof whatsoever of this.

Now that's a personal attack. Why don't you IM me using one of the various methods like AIM, Yahoo, or MSN. Maybe if we talk about something other than this, you be surprised at just how level headed I am.

The problem here is that people do not want to see past their biasness and actually listen to what is being said. That goes for both sides in this debate.I see past biases but not past dead or displaced Palestinians. And I don't see past the history of Jewish immigration into Palestine and their motivation.
And now go play with some bibles.

Belgium?
Lithuania?
Want to provide proof of your Liechtenstein comment?
If you don't provide proof on this forum,we all just laugh at your point and ignore you.

well for belgium...
the only thing that comes to mind is Congo. They practiced racial discrimination believing the Tutsis were superior to the Hutus due because one group was taller than the other..... alot of problems of the gongo war can be attributed to belgiums racial definitions of teh time.
best i could think of.

lithuania. nothing that i can think of.

You are an idiot.

Israel is a peaceful democracy that is only responding to aggressors. the Nazis attacked people without provocation and tortured them and killed them. How the hell can you even compare the two?

:upyours:
you son of a bitch

Granted,Israel was "reacting" to Hezbollah attacks,but it was overly harsh.Not to mention,they bombed civilian areas who they thought were hiding Hezbollah activists or supporters.
Also,a little friendly warning-your last point.If you do it again,the mods will have a nasty thing to say to you.And may ban/delete you.Read the forum rules,it's called "flamebaiting."

Their colonisation of the Congo was not done by force-they were given it at the Berlin conference back in the 19th Century.And they weren't nearly as bad as other nations in colonisation.

You are right that they were given it at the Berlin Conference that divided up the Continent. Now I would also like you to provide proof that they were not as bad as others.

Point taken.

:)

Huzzah!

hehe.

Fun,ain't it?

Much fun.

No, that was 2000. Oslo is where they signed. Are you having another "no Arabs around...." moment?

:rolleyes: are you having a senior moment?

Then why not negotiate instead of WALKING FROM THE TABLE?There is no point in "negotiating" an offer that was meant to be an insult from the get-go.
Again, prove that it will be for all time! You have no proof that it would be for all time.As if.
Again, I'm calling Bullshit for you have no proof whatsoever of this.Just go and read the "offer", christian kid. 2000 was even worse. Any proposal that gave sovereignty to Israel and "autonomy" to Palestinians = rule to Jews and no rights to Arabs.

actually leichtenstein in theory is the inheritor of the Holy roman empire. as the rest of it split of and became other nations (germany, austria, etc..)

So in theory they could be guilty of the genocide of many balt tribes and so on.

but i am reaching a bit...

I see past biases but not past dead or displaced Palestinians. And I don't see past the history of Jewish immigration into Palestine and their motivation.
And now go play with some bibles.

You know! I'm a peaceful person. However, you are really starting to test my patience.

You may not see past what is being reported in the press but what you are failing to do is looking at the ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE GOD DAMN REGION! Once you learn the history of the region a bit more, then maybe you will be a better debator in this matter.

You are right that they were given it at the Berlin Conference that divided up the Continent. Now I would also like you to provide proof that they were not as bad as others.

Ahhh come on,the Brits were far worse.Especially with the Zulus and Boers.Those were some brutal wars.Belgian colonisation hardly gets a mention anymore.

:rolleyes: are you having a senior moment?

"The Oslo Accords, officially called the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements or Declaration of Principles (DOP), were finalized in Oslo, Norway on August 20, 1993, and subsequently officially signed at a public ceremony in Washington D.C. on September 13, 1993, with Yassir Arafat signing for the Palestine Liberation Organization and Shimon Peres signing for the State of Israel."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Agreement

Oslo. They signed.

There is no point in "negotiating" an offer that was meant to be an insult from the get-go.

If he negotiated as a true head of state would have done, he would have gotten a thing called a compromise. I guess you do not know what that might mean? Your nothing but an anti-semite that wants all the jews gone from the region. That means you support Genocide according to the defintion of the word Genocide.

As if.

Prove it then. I dare you too. Prove that it would be for all time. Oh wait, you can't!

Just go and read the "offer", christian kid.

I have read the offer child. What I fail to see is Arafat's counter proposal and negotiations taking place.

You know! I'm a peaceful person. However, you are really starting to test my patience.

You may not see past what is being reported in the press but what you are failing to do is looking at the ENTIRE HISTORY OF THE GOD DAMN REGION! Once you learn the history of the region a bit more, then maybe you will be a better debator in this matter.You are not a peaceful person. You hate Arabs and all true Semites. You endorse Israel which is identical to wanting Palestinians to suffer and to give up their homeland of centuries.
And I suppose I have a far better understanding of the entire history of the Middle east than you do. I am just not a christian retard who sees everything from a pro-jewish perspective.

You are not a peaceful person. And I suppose I have a far better understanding of the entire history of the Middle east than you do. I am just not a christian retard who sees everything from a pro-jewish perspective.

The ENTIRE history of the Middle East?Stretching a tad,eh?

"The Oslo Accords, officially called the Declaration of Principles on Interim Self-Government Arrangements or Declaration of Principles (DOP), were finalized in Oslo, Norway on August 20, 1993, and subsequently officially signed at a public ceremony in Washington D.C. on September 13, 1993, with Yassir Arafat signing for the Palestine Liberation Organization and Shimon Peres signing for the State of Israel."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Agreement

Oslo. They signed.

Sorry. Thinking about Camp david Accords. Meh. Don't matter as he stated on Jordanian State television: that the Oslo Accord signing was a ploy, referencing Mohammed's breaking of his truce with the Meccans as historical justification for the ruse. (from the Article)

The PA rejected the Oslo accords that offered up nearly everything they wanted. .

Above is your earlier statement re the Oslo accords. As I said earlier the accords broke down, but your claim of rejection is incorrect, as they did in fact negotiate and sign them.

Sorry. Thinking about Camp david Accords. Meh. Don't matter as he stated on Jordanian State television: that the Oslo Accord signing was a ploy, referencing Mohammed's breaking of his truce with the Meccans as historical justification for the ruse. (from the Article)

And from the same article, a fact I also mentioned earlier -

"After the signing of the agreements Israeli settlement expansion accelerated to five times its original rate, leading to frustration amongst many Palestinians and a general distrust of the accords and of Israeli intentions. "

You are not a peaceful person. You hate Arabs and all true Semites.

Define a true semite. Also, I am a peaceful person. I do not support wars for territorial gain. The only time I do is when it is in self-defense as the 1948 war clearly was. As to hating Arabs, that is also an incorrect assessment of me as well as I have tried to explain to you before. I support a Palestinian State. I support Arabs who respect Israel's territorial integrity along side a Palestinian state. I want to visit Jordan and Egypt one day because of the history that they have. I have a high regard for them because of their history. What I despise is the fact that Hamas and others have decided to blow themselves up and killing innocent people. Yes Israel has done so as well. Some intentionally but mostly as a consequence of these groups actions. I will put this in caps for you: NO ONE SIDE IS SOLEY RESPONSIBLE FOR VIOLENCE IN THE REGION!

You endorse Israel which is identical to wanting Palestinians to suffer and to give up their homeland of centuries.

I call bullshit and will continue to do so. Newsflash: It IS NOT THEIR HOMELAND ANYMORE THAN IT IS THE ISRAELIS!

And I suppose I have a far better understanding of the entire history of the Middle east than you do. I am just not a christian retard who sees everything from a pro-jewish perspective.

Bolded based on what? And I am getting tired of you bashing my religion. I do not bash you for not being a Christian. I respect people of all faiths, colors and creeds. I'm a very tolerant person. So I suggest you cease your attacks on my faith for you know nothing about me.

And from the same article, a fact I also mentioned earlier -

"After the signing of the agreements Israeli settlement expansion accelerated to five times its original rate, leading to frustration amongst many Palestinians and a general distrust of the accords and of Israeli intentions. "

As I have stated before. Both sides are guilty of keeping this conflict going.

Define a true semite.

Someone who speaks a language that is native to the middle-east region. Languages such as Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Akkadian, and Amharic.

You are not a peaceful person. You hate Arabs and all true Semites. You endorse Israel which is identical to wanting Palestinians to suffer and to give up their homeland of centuries.
And I suppose I have a far better understanding of the entire history of the Middle east than you do. I am just not a christian retard who sees everything from a pro-jewish perspective.

Seriously,stop taking religion out on people.It's got pretty much fuck all to do with this particular argument.
Why drag it in?Because your a troll?

Someone who speaks a language that is native to the middle-east region. Languages such as Hebrew, Arabic, Aramaic, Akkadian, and Amharic.

In other words, the Israelis who speak Hebrew, are also true semites. Something UB seems to keep forgetting.

In other words, the Israelis who speak Hebrew, are also true semites. Something UB seems to keep forgetting.

Yep.

Palestine is and will always remain the natural homeland of Palestinians, no matter who has taken it by now.
The best solution of course would be that Israel finally officially annexes Gaza and the West Bank, lets all Palestinian refugees back to their homes, and gives full voting rights to all Palestinians.

Yep.

On top of that, by advocating that all jews should leave his so-called "occupied land", he is, in reality, advocating Genocide. :gasp:

On top of that, by advocating that all jews should leave his so-called "occupied land", he is, in reality, advocating Genocide. :gasp:

So now packing your bags = mass-murder?

Palestine is and will always remain the natural homeland of Palestinians, no matter who has taken it by now.
The best solution of course would be that Israel finally officially annexes Gaza and the West Bank, lets all Palestinian refugees back to their homes, and gives full voting rights to all Palestinians.

Would have already happened by now if not for Hamas, Al Aqsa Martyers Brigade, and Islamic Jihad blowing up Innocent men, women, and children. Something that the West severally frowns upon.

So now packing your bags = mass-murder?

Who me? Pack my bags? Not when I'm having fun poking holes into UB's arguments.

So now packing your bags = mass-murder?

Oh and one other thing. Genocide does not necessarily means mass slaughter of people.

Who me? Pack my bags? Not when I'm having fun poking holes into UB's arguments.

I was talking about the inhabitants of Israel. And yes, I can see you're having fun, carry on :p

Palestine is and will always remain the natural homeland of Palestinians, no matter who has taken it by now.
The best solution of course would be that Israel finally officially annexes Gaza and the West Bank, lets all Palestinian refugees back to their homes, and gives full voting rights to all Palestinians.

Why are those Palestinian refugees "refugees?"
Because they have no homes.They're displaced.In a perfect world that would work.But it's not a perfect world.

Seriously,stop taking religion out on people.It's got pretty much fuck all to do with this particular argument.
Why drag it in?Because your a troll?Evangelical Christians live in some kind of weird parallel universe. The lack every sense of reality. And they hate Arabs.

I was talking about the inhabitants of Israel. And yes, I can see you're having fun, carry on :p

Hehe. Thanks.

Would have already happened by now if not for Hamas, Al Aqsa Martyers Brigade, and Islamic Jihad blowing up Innocent men, women, and children. Something that the West severally frowns upon.

Frowns upon it.Doesn't do much about it.
And it's spelt "severely."Hehe. :P

Evangelical Christians live in some kind of weird parallel universe. The lack every sense of reality. And they hate Arabs.

Now this is the most funniest thing I have ever heard today. Please tell me that you are not basing all of us on what Fred Phelps and Pat Robertson say! I do not watch nor listen to them and most of the time, condemn what they are saying as unchristian.

Frowns upon it.Doesn't do much about it.
And it's spelt "severely."Hehe. :P

I still haven't recovered from Finals Week! Gah! I need a vacation. LOL

Evangelical Christians live in some kind of weird parallel universe. The lack every sense of reality. And they hate Arabs.

Yes.All evangelical Christians are racist bigoted pigs,all of them hate Arabs,and they all "live in some weird parallel universe" where only they are perfect and the rest of us,including people like me (more moderate Christians) are all going to hell.
You know,I see exactly where you're coming from. :rolleyes:

Proof about Leichtenstien:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9804E7DB153AF933A15754C0A9679C8B63

Belgium is very guilty of genocide, they murdered 28 million, yes 28 million, Africans in the early 20th Century. Look up the book "King Leopold's Ghost" for more proof.

I still haven't recovered from Finals Week! Gah! I need a vacation. LOL

It shows :D
Meh I have exams in January,expect my grammar to go down the shitter somewhere around there.

On top of that, by advocating that all jews should leave his so-called "occupied land", he is, in reality, advocating Genocide. Coming to a foreign land and removing its population is genocide. That what Jews did and do since the start of the Zionist movement. Even today they keep on pouring into the West Bank to raise their illegal settlements. They are building a Wall around Samaria to create the world's greatest detention/concentration camp ever. And you support that.

Coming to a foreign land and removing its population is genocide.

Since they did not remove the entire population, then it is not Genocide. Did they tell people to leave? Yes. Did the Arabs tell people to leave? Yes! Are you going to condemn the Arabs as well of Genocide or are you going to label only Israel?

That what Jews did and do since the start of the Zionist movement.

And the Arabs did not order people out?

Even today they keep on pouring into the West Bank to raise their illegal settlements. They are building a Wall around Samaria to create the world's greatest detention/concentration camp ever. And you support that.

I call bullshit on the next to last sentence. As to the very last sentence, you support the forced removal of all Jews from a recognized state. That is the very essence of Genocide.

Coming to a foreign land and removing its population is genocide. That what Jews did and do since the start of the Zionist movement. Even today they keep on pouring into the West Bank to raise their illegal settlements. They are building a Wall around Samaria to create the world's greatest detention/concentration camp ever. And you support that.

gen·o·cide :

the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

ex·ter·mi·nate :

to get rid of by destroying; destroy totally; extirpate: to exterminate an enemy; to exterminate insects


Even though there's something fishy going on in that area and has been doing so for a couple of decades, it does not qualify for the use of the word 'extermination' and thus genocide does not qualify.

Coming to a foreign land and removing its population is genocide. That what Jews did and do since the start of the Zionist movement. Even today they keep on pouring into the West Bank to raise their illegal settlements. They are building a Wall around Samaria to create the world's greatest detention/concentration camp ever. And you support that.

You really make me laugh.
"ZOMG TeH ZIoNisTS!" It's all a big Zionist conspiracy,all bent on the destruction of Palestine,all bent on the expansion of Israel.They are all out to get us.Hide your women and children!

Since they did not remove the entire population, then it is not Genocide. Did they tell people to leave? Yes. Did the Arabs tell people to leave? Yes! Are you going to condemn the Arabs as well of Genocide or are you going to label only Israel?What a stupid distinction. Ethic cleansing is genocide, no matter how far you succeed.

And the Arabs did not order people out?Only as a reaction to Jewish aggression. Revenge is justified.

I call bullshit on the last sentence.I don't care what you call. You are pro-Israel and anti-Arab.

gen·o·cide :

the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.

ex·ter·mi·nate :

to get rid of by destroying; destroy totally; extirpate: to exterminate an enemy; to exterminate insects


Even though there's something fishy going on in that area and has been doing so for a couple of decades, it does not qualify for the use of the word 'extermination' and thus genocide does not qualify.

And I've been using the wrong word. It is not Genocide he is advocating, he is advocating Ethnic Cleansing which is just as bad.

Coming to a foreign land and removing its population is genocide.
Genocide is the killing of all members of an ethnic/religious group. Mass deportation is not genocide.

That what Jews did and do since the start of the Zionist movement. Even today they keep on pouring into the West Bank to raise their illegal settlements.
You really do love massive generalizations don't you? Yes, I'm sure all of the Jews of the world support the settlers.

What a stupid distinction. Ethic cleansing is genocide, no matter how far you succeed.

Are you going to say that the Arabs engaged in it as well?

Only as a reaction to Jewish aggression. Revenge is justified.

Not when it comes to Innocent Men, women, and children you dote. I see you only want to play the Blame Israel solely game. Stay inside your rose-colored world and let those of us with knowledge of both sides atrocities continue to debate.

I don't care what you call. You are pro-Israel and anti-Arab.

Then you are a fool and an Jew hater who advocates the very thing he is accusing Israel of. I'm calling you a hypocrit.

gen·o·cide :
the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group.Jews came to Palestine with the clearly set aim to create their Jewish state there. Logic dictates that since Palestine was already populated, the only way to set up a state, was to remove those who lived there. That's what Jews did ever since they poured into Palestine. They tried to supplant the present population with ever increasing aggression until they finally declared statehood and thus war (even before the mandate was up).

What a stupid distinction. Ethic cleansing is genocide, no matter how far you succeed.

Only as a reaction to Jewish aggression. Revenge is justified.

I don't care what you call. You are pro-Israel and anti-Arab.

It only really gets the term "genocide" if it kills a lot of people,in a 'use of the word sense.'I do see what you're getting at though.
Revenge is never justified.Ever."An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind."
And we don't care what you say.You're talking a lot of crap and making a lot of sweeping generalisations.Including your generalisations about AG2."You hate the Arabs!You love the Jews!AAAAGGHH!"

Jews came to Palestine with the clearly set aim to create their Jewish state there. Logic dictates that since Palestine was already populated, the only way to set up a state, was to remove those who lived there. That's what Jews did ever since they poured into Palestine. They tried to supplant the present population with ever increasing aggression until they finally declared statehood and thus war (even before the mandate was up).

Its called ethnic cleansing and not genocide. Something that both sides engaged in in 1948.

You're talking a lot of crap and making a lot of sweeping generalisations.Including your generalisations about AG2."You hate the Arabs!You love the Jews!AAAAGGHH!"

And it really is getting annoying.

Jews came to Palestine with the clearly set aim to create their Jewish state there. Logic dictates that since Palestine was already populated, the only way to set up a state, was to remove those who lived there. That's what Jews did ever since they poured into Palestine. They tried to supplant the present population with ever increasing aggression until they finally declared statehood and thus war (even before the mandate was up).

Extermination implies killing, Israel did not seek to kill every Arab, but to simply take control of their land.

Fail.

If deportation equates to genocide then false imprisonment equates to homocide.

And it really is getting annoying.

Quite my friend,quite.I can't be arsed with this anymore.Bed.Night.

how idiotic
learn history:rolleyes:

Easy to claim somoene is an idiot when you're too stupid to actually read hs next post where he points out that he was being silly. But that's okay. I forgive you.

Genocide is the killing of all members of an ethnic/religious group. Mass deportation is not genocide.If it results in the deaths of those deported it is. And I also count attempted genocide as such. The attitude is as despicable as the deed.

You really do love massive generalizations don't you? Yes, I'm sure all of the Jews of the world support the settlers.We are talking about the Jews who have immigrated to Palestine and their offspring here. And those indeed support the settlers. Or do you see them do anything against them?

Jews came to Palestine with the clearly set aim to create their Jewish state there. Logic dictates that since Palestine was already populated, the only way to set up a state, was to remove those who lived there. That's what Jews did ever since they poured into Palestine. They tried to supplant the present population with ever increasing aggression until they finally declared statehood and thus war (even before the mandate was up).

The solution was and is not to remove either people. That will in effect only create new problems as many israeli's consider it 'their' land as well. Let's hypothesize that you succeed in 'removing' the jews from the 'occupied' land. Where would you put them after? They would still want a place to call their own.

They will just have to learn to live in harmony. And no, building a big brick wall with barbed wire on top won't do any good to such a process.

Extermination implies killing, Israel did not seek to kill every Arab, but to simply take control of their land. The result is the same. A dead Arab. And wanting control over someone's else's land is just as evil. And thx for admitting what the Jews' aim was.

The solution was and is not to remove either people. That will in effect only create new problems as many israeli's consider it 'their' land as well. Let's hypothesize that you succeed in 'removing' the jews from the 'occupied' land. Where would you put them after? They would still want a place to call their own.

They will just have to learn to live in harmony. And no, building a big brick wall with barbed wire on top won't do any good to such a process.Where to put the Jews then? Give them half of any US state. The UN will surely draw up a partition plan.

Where to put the Jews then? Give them half of any US state. The UN will surely draw up a partition plan.

And what will you do with the people that lived in that half of that particular state before that? Relocate them as well? Yes, I can see this working already.

But that wasn't the question. It was whether Israel or the Nazis were worse; you've answered that question. Genocidal bastards!
Are we working on numbers killed, or percentage of the target group killed?

Palestine is and will always remain the natural homeland of Palestinians, no matter who has taken it by now.
It wasn't the Jewish homeland always; why do you think it will remain so for the Palestinians?

Oh and one other thing. Genocide does not necessarily means mass slaughter of people.
Yes, it does.

Evangelical Christians live in some kind of weird parallel universe. The lack every sense of reality. And they hate Arabs.
No, they don't.

Even today they keep on pouring into the West Bank to raise their illegal settlements. They are building a Wall around Samaria to create the world's greatest detention/concentration camp ever. And you support that.
Supporting Israel's existence isn't the same as supporting their policies.

The result is the same. A dead Arab.
Every Palestinian Arab in the Gaza Strip and the Westbank is dead? As well as all the ones who emigrated to other Arab countries? When did that happen?

And wanting control over someone's else's land is just as evil.
No.
And thx for admitting what the Jews' aim was.
No one was disputing that.

And what will you do with the people that lived in that half of that particular state before that? Relocate them as well? Yes, I can see this working already.What now? You care about those who lived in that half of that particular state before that? Why? You don't seem to care that the same was applied to the Palestinian Arabs. Yes, I can also see this working already. In Palestine.

Are we working on numbers killed, or percentage of the target group killed?

Revenue perhaps? Or number of shells fired?

And wanting control over someone's else's land is just as evil.

That's just capitalism. It's not evil.

Hmmm. Maybe UB is right. Maybe we should go ahead and DO what he is claiming we do, then there won't be a problem any more. Perhaps we should actually kill every Palestinian, or force them to move to Syria or Iran. Then the whole problem would just...peter out.

Or maybe that would be ethnic cleansing and genocide. Oh well. They ARE just arabs, who as we all know are the next best thing to nazi's...:rolleyes:

What now? You care about those who lived in that half of that particular state before that? Why?

Because it's their home? How would you feel if you were relocated?

You don't seem to care that the same was applied to the Palestinian
Arabs.

I wonder where on earth you got that idea? Are you using the principle of 'You are with me or against me'? It seems that way. It's pretty damn gnarly anyway.

Yes, I can also see this working already. In Palestine.

You can? How? Elaborate please.

Because it's their home? How would you feel if you were relocated?What's your point? Palestine was the Palestinian Arabs home. You don't care about them so why would you care about any US state's half population?

I wonder where on earth you got that idea? Are you using the principle of 'You are with me or against me'? It seems that way. It's pretty damn gnarly anyway.See above.

You can? How? Elaborate please.See above.

What's your point? Palestine was the Palestinian Arabs home. You don't care about them so why would you care about any US state's half population?

Pie, bacon and cheese. I never said I didn't care about the PA's. You just assumed. Either you fail to grasp that I am neither for pro-Israel not pro-Palestina or you just refuse to understand what I am saying because you are stuck in your own circular reasoning in which the Palestinians are poor helpless victims and the Jews are Satan incarnate. Either way:

Fail.

See above.

See above. :rolleyes:

See above.

Looked. Looked again. Didn't find it. If it's really there, please post it for me. If it's not, no harm done. Not everyone's a good liar.

That's just capitalism. It's not evil.

It's as close to evil as makes no difference.

It's as close to evil as makes no difference.

If capitalism is evil then so are natural selection and nature.

If capitalism is evil then so are natural selection and nature.

Well, "evil" isn't natural, anyway... so how do make capitalism out as being natural, then?

Well, "evil" isn't natural, anyway...

Nor is capitalism. Your point?

Pie, bacon and cheese. I never said I didn't care about the PA's. You just assumed. Either you fail to grasp that I am neither for pro-Israel not pro-Palestina or you just refuse to understand what I am saying because you are stuck in your own circular reasoning in which the Palestinians are poor helpless victims and the Jews are Satan incarnate.You asked about what would happen to the people that lived in that half of that particular state before its assumed partition. Well, you didn't express your dismay about this being done to the Palestinians by immigrant Jews, so you didn't seem to care. I on the other hand don't care where the immigrant Jews and their offspring would go then. Away would be sufficient.
And Palestinian Arabs really are helpless victims. They are the victims of the immigrant Jews and the of the LoN/Brits/UN who backed those Jews and continue to do so.

there we go again. The palestinians are poor helpless victims. See? I think we should actually victimize them so poor old UB will understand what it really is. At the moment he is a bit confused. Someone post the numbers of Palestinians flaoting around the west bank etc for us...Then we can knock their numbers down to 10% of what they are now. THAt is genocide. THAT is what UB is claiming is happening, incorrectly.

I'd say the Nazi's.....

there we go again. The palestinians are poor helpless victims. See? I think we should actually victimize them so poor old UB will understand what it really is. At the moment he is a bit confused. Someone post the numbers of Palestinians flaoting around the west bank etc for us...Then we can knock their numbers down to 10% of what they are now. THAt is genocide. THAT is what UB is claiming is happening, incorrectly.You're just an Arab hater like AC2. And a Western imperialist.

You asked about what would happen to the people that lived in that half of that particular state before its assumed partition. Well, you didn't express your dismay about this being done to the Palestinians by immigrant Jews, so you didn't seem to care. I on the other hand don't care where the immigrant Jews and their offspring would go then. Away would be sufficient.

A well-worked out plan. Inexecutable, but well-worked out. :rolleyes:

And Palestinian Arabs really are helpless victims. They are the victims of the immigrant Jews and the of the LoN/Brits/UN who backed those Jews and continue to do so.

Yes, I never quite agreed to those methods either. However, if you read the history books on it, WWII was over, there were over 6 million jews exterminated and they were still being prosecuted in other countries. In order to prevent the black pages of history from stretching even further they had to have somewhere to go. Looking back, I agree with you, it wasn't the brightest of places to pick, nor was it the brightest of executions of a plan nor was it a good plan. But it happened. And now we're stuck with the current situation.

What I'm trying to say is that saying "It was the arab's land!" won't do any good. One could argue that it was jewish land a few hundred years before the arabs took it over.

It's no use arguing about what has been and was. It's time for them to start looking at the future.

A well-worked out plan. Inexecutable, but well-worked out. :rolleyes:



Yes, I never quite agreed to those methods either. However, if you read the history books on it, WWII was over, there were over 6 million jews exterminated and they were still being prosecuted in other countries. In order to prevent the black pages of history from stretching even further they had to have somewhere to go. Looking back, I agree with you, it wasn't the brightest of places to pick, nor was it the brightest of executions of a plan nor was it a good plan. But it happened. And now we're stuck with the current situation.

What I'm trying to say is that saying "It was the arab's land!" won't do any good. One could argue that it was jewish land a few hundred years before the arabs took it over.

It's no use arguing about what has been and was. It's time for them to start looking at the future.We are stuck with the current situation? The West caused Palestine to fall apart and its original population to diminish. Now it's time for the West to correct this terrible error of letting the Jews they couldn't get along with to come to Palestine. But as I see in Afghanistan and Iraq the West only seems to be capable of messing up but not of cleaning up their mess. Get the immigrant Jews out of Palestine and restore what Palestine should have been before it was given into the hands of the untrustworthy British administration. Let the Jews pack and go, let them go just the same way they came. With Israelis, their attitude, and their wall in the land there can be no future for Palestine.

Get the immigrant Jews out of Palestine and restore what Palestine should have been before it was given into the hands of the untrustworthy British administration.
So a dictatorship that oppresses human rights?

You're just an Arab hater like AC2. And a Western imperialist.

sure UB. Sure. And you are a loon who should be locked in a padded cell wearing a straightjacket and a ball gag. But that's neither here nor there. In the meantime, you're still wrong about the events in Israel/Palestine being genocide or ethnic cleansing. they are brutish at times, as a result of stupidity from both sides. And they are sad. But not genocide.

We are stuck with the current situation? The West caused Palestine to fall apart and its original population to diminish. Now it's time for the West to correct this terrible error of letting the Jews they couldn't get along with to come to Palestine. But as I see in Afghanistan and Iraq the West only seems to be capable of messing up but not of cleaning up their mess.

Agreed.

Get the immigrant Jews out of Palestine and restore what Palestine should have been before it was given into the hands of the untrustworthy British administration. Let the Jews pack and go, let them go just the same way they came.

Not going to happen. No matter how hard you would wish for it. So deal.

With the isrealian attitude, and their wall in the land there can be no future for Palestine.

Agreed.

So a dictatorship that oppresses human rights?As if. If Arabs would have been allowed their state after the end of Turkish rule, as was promised to them, I believe it would have been a pretty progressive and open society. But that was prevented by the colonial powers who again brought the region under foreign rule. Tell me: what reason was there really to slice up the region into spheres of British/French interest that were later made into petty states?

Yes, it does.

I corrected myself. I realized I was using the wrong word.

As if. If Arabs would have been allowed their state after the end of Turkish rule, as was promised to them, I believe it would have been a pretty progressive and open society. But that was prevented by the colonial powers who again brought the region under foreign rule. Tell me: what reason was there really to slice up the region into spheres of British/French interest that were later made into petty states?
Again, I'm going by pretty much every other country in the Middle East here.

I wonder where on earth you got that idea? Are you using the principle of 'You are with me or against me'? It seems that way. It's pretty damn gnarly anyway.

Notice that he calls anyone who disagrees with him an arab hater and an anti-semite?

Notice that he calls anyone who disagrees with him an arab hater and an anti-semite?

He seems to have calmed down a bit on that part. Even a little bit of patience can go a long way. ;)

Pie, bacon and cheese. I never said I didn't care about the PA's. You just assumed. Either you fail to grasp that I am neither for pro-Israel not pro-Palestina or you just refuse to understand what I am saying because you are stuck in your own circular reasoning in which the Palestinians are poor helpless victims and the Jews are Satan incarnate. Either way:

Fail.



See above. :rolleyes:



Looked. Looked again. Didn't find it. If it's really there, please post it for me. If it's not, no harm done. Not everyone's a good liar.

Welcome to UB's reasoning.

Welcome to UB's reasoning.

A bit late for introductions isn't it? I've been following the show since page 159 :p

And Palestinian Arabs really are helpless victims.

HAHA! Most of them are caught in the middle between the damn terrorists and the IDF. Israeli civilians hvae been intentionally targeted because Hamas and Al Aqsa Martyers Brigade want to see the destruction of Israel. Something that you also support. By supporting such, you support the same sort of thing that you accuse Israel of doing! Ethnic Cleansing.

You're just an Arab hater like AC2. And a Western imperialist.

Because we disagree with what you say? How can you call someone an Arab hater when they disagree with what you are saying?

A bit late for introductions isn't it? I've been following the show since page 159 :p

LOL! True.

Notice that he calls anyone who disagrees with him an arab hater and an anti-semite?Because that's what every supporter of Israel is. Being pro-Israel means to be supportive of the unjustifiable partition of Palestine against the will of the majority of its population then and there. To decide anything over the head of the population in question is an act of hate and aggression against this population, as was the UN decision. Anyone who backs this decision is an Arab-hater and thus an anti-Semite. There is no way around this. And as an evangelical Christian is is pretty clear why you hate Arabs and expect of them to accept the theft of a part of their homeland, integrity, and sovereignty. You and your lousy president surely would be in the very first row if ever a new Crusade was called.

Because that's what every supporter of Israel is. Being pro-Israel means to be supportive of the unjustifiable partition of Palestine against the will of the majority of its population then and there. To decide anything over the head of the population in question is an act of hate and aggression against this population, as was the UN decision. Anyone who backs this decision is an Arab-hater and thus an anti-Semite. There is no way around this. And as an evangelical Christian is is pretty clear why you hate Arabs and expect of them to accept the theft of a part of their homeland, integrity, and sovereignty.

No one hates Arabs here, it's all in your head. You are just hateful and angry because you are losing an argument.

No one hates Arabs here, it's all in your head. You are just hateful and angry because you are losing an argument.I am not losing an argument. Palestinians are losing their homes and lives. But you still support the intruders.

No one hates Arabs here, it's all in your head. You are just hateful and angry because you are losing an argument.

Thats about it. You can support the state of Israel without being anti-Arab. You could support the original mandate that called for the creation of a Jewish and an Arab state.

I am not losing an argument. Palestinians are losing their homes and lives. But you still support the intruders.
Israelis are losing their homes and their lives too.

Because that's what every supporter of Israel is. Being pro-Israel means to be supportive of the unjustifiable partition of Palestine against the will of the majority of its population then and there. To decide anything over the head of the population in question is an act of hate and aggression against this population, as was the UN decision. Anyone who backs this decision is an Arab-hate and thus an anti-Semite. There is no way around this. And as an evangelical Christian is is pretty clear why you hate Arabs and expect of them to accept the theft of a part of their homeland, integrity, and sovereignty.

Eveyone that doesn't agree with unexecutable and outrageous relocation plans is pro-israelian?

I mean, can you even fathom the cost of such an operation? It will be very costly. And I doubt anyone would be willing to pay for it.

Because that's what every supporter of Israel is.

So those who disagree with you support Israel and therefor are jewish haters even though I stated, to Nodinia, that BOTH SIDES keep the violence going?

Being pro-Israel means to be supportive of the unjustifiable partition of Palestine against the will of the majority of its population then and there.

Unjustified according to whom? Seems like most of the world (and that includes NON-WESTERN nations as well) seemed to think it works. BTW: did you know that Jerusalem (one of the keys in this fight) was scheduled to be an open, international city owned by no one? Guess who thwarted that? That's right, the Arabs did. Look, I admire your spirit but you really do need to tone down the language just a tad. It does not do this discussion any with you labeling any who disagrees with you an arab hater.

To decide anything over the head of the population in question is an act of hate and aggression against this population, as was the UN decision.

Hey I can agree with you. However, whats done is done and there is really nothing we can do to change it short of violating International law.

Anyone who backs this decision is an Arab-hate and thus an anti-Semite.

Which in turn makes you an anti-semite for advocating the removal of the Jewish State whose official language is Hebrew which is a semetic language.

There is no way around this.

There's plenty of ways around it. Its called not generalizing everyone who disagrees with you an Arab-hater/anti-semite.

And as an evangelical Christian is is pretty clear why you hate Arabs and expect of them to accept the theft of their land, integrity, and sovereignty.

1) I do not support expulsion of any race, religion, or creed.

2) I do not support Hamas for their continued refusal to renounce violence as a way to achieve their goals.

3) Stop trying to bring my religion into this. It has no bearing on this thread and you are using it to tell me what you think I am even though it is false. You still have not answered my question in regards where you think all Evangelicals hate arabs! Was it Fred Phelps or Pat Robertson?

Thats about it. You can support the state of Israel without being anti-Arab. You could support the original mandate that called for the creation of a Jewish and an Arab state.

That's true. Moreover you can be a Zionist AND support a two states agreement.

Israelis are losing their homes and their lives too.They could have gone elsewhere when they were offered it. But they deliberately chose to be the Palestinians' bane for ideological motives.

You and your lousy president surely would be in the very first row if ever a new Crusade was called.

Why would I get involved in a crusade? I hate wars for religious reasons.

Thats about it. You can support the state of Israel without being anti-Arab. You could support the original mandate that called for the creation of a Jewish and an Arab state.The original mandate called for a Jewish state? Was there a referendum on that?

No one hates Arabs here, it's all in your head. You are just hateful and angry because you are losing an argument.

Regretably :(

They could have gone elsewhere when they were offered it. But they deliberately chose to be the Palestinians' bane for ideological motives.
What else were they offered? A swampy plot of land in Eastern Russia deliberately chosen to keep the Jews out of the way so the world wouldn't have to look at them any more?

The original mandate called for a Jewish state? Was there a referendum on that?

It was the late 40's. Things were ... less complicated, back then.

I am not losing an argument. Palestinians are losing their homes and lives. But you still support the intruders.

And the Israelis are losing their businesses and children because of Hamas's suicide bombings.

Eveyone that doesn't agree with unexecutable and outrageous relocation plans is pro-israelian?

I mean, can you even fathom the cost of such an operation? It will be very costly. And I doubt anyone would be willing to pay for it.The cost? Not as high as the cost for the Palestinians if they remain.

It was the late 40's. Things were ... less complicated, back then.The mandate wasn't set up in the late 40's.

The cost? Not as high as the cost for the Palestinians if they remain.

They more they blow themselves up, the more people are going to do in the ensuing violence. Violence begets violence. Understand?

The original mandate called for a Jewish state?

Yes, after WWI Great Britain had taken control over the area of Palestine from the Ottoman empire. Great Britain intended to create a Jewish and an Arab state. I believe this was going to be beneficial to both Jews and Arabs as both of them would have been given self-determination.

The cost? Not as high as the cost for the Palestinians if they remain.

Remain bombing themselves and other to death? Just like the isrealis? Yes, death and destruction on both sides will most assuredly bring progress and prospherity.

What else were they offered? A swampy plot of land in Eastern Russia deliberately chosen to keep the Jews out of the way so the world wouldn't have to look at them any more?And? So you admit it really wasn't about a state for the Jews? It was about punishing Arabs.

And the Israelis are losing their businesses and children because of Hamas's suicide bombings.

Israel stops their actions, and perhaps they can avoid violence being done to them.

And? So you admit it really wasn't about a state for the Jews? It was about punishing Arabs.

Wow, you are getting less rational by the second.

And? So you admit it really wasn't about a state for the Jews? It was about punishing Arabs.
Uh, what the hell are you talking about? You're just leaping on every opportunity to say "YOU HATE T3H ARABS!!!!" at everyone who opposes you.

The mandate wasn't set up in the late 40's.

Talking about the Belfor Declaration of 1917:

The United Kingdom was granted control of Palestine by the Versailles Peace Conference which established the League of Nations in 1919 and appointed Herbert Samuel, a former Postmaster General in the British cabinet, who was instrumental in drafting the Balfour Declaration, as its first High Commissioner in Palestine. During World War I the British had made two promises regarding territory in the Middle East. Britain had promised the local Arabs, through Lawrence of Arabia, independence for a united Arab country covering most of the Arab Middle East, in exchange for their supporting the British; and Britain had promised to create and foster a Jewish national home as laid out in the Balfour Declaration, 1917.

Answer is yes.

Israel stops their actions, and perhaps they can avoid violence being done to them.

No, Hamas cannot tolerate even the existence of Israel, they will not stop until every Jew is dead and Israel is destroyed.

Israel stops their actions, and perhaps they can avoid violence being done to them.

Talk about a pipe dream. Do you honestly believe that?

Israel stops their actions, and perhaps they can avoid violence being done to them.

Both sides have actually tried that several times. But somehow things tend to blow up and get killed even though violence is ordered to stop. This goes for both sides as well.

nazis. i have never heard of isreali death camps.

nazis. i have never heard of isreali death camps.

Be patient :p

Yes, after WWI Great Britain had taken control over the area of Palestine from the Ottoman empire. Great Britain intended to create a Jewish and an Arab state. I believe this was going to be beneficial to both Jews and Arabs as both of them would have been given self-determination.When the Ottoman Empire ended and a mandate was set up for the Middle East by the League of Nations and the region was divided into spheres of interest, there were only roughly 80000 Jews in Palestine along with 70000 Christians and half a million Muslims/Arabs. So why would there be a need for a Jewish state when only around 11% of the population was Jewish?

The original mandate called for a Jewish state? Was there a referendum on that?

The Jews were a majority in what was made Israel according to the UN demographers, and Israel offers protections for minorities, it being a democracy and all. Unlike the Arab state surounding it, some of which wont allow you to own any land if your a jew.

When the Ottoman Empire ended and a mandate was set up for the Middle East by the League of Nations and the region was divided into spheres of interest, there were only roughly 80000 Jews in Palestine along with 70000 Christians and half a million Muslims/Arabs. So why would there be a need for a Jewish state when only around 11% of the population was Jewish?

Could it be because that was what was agreed to by the chief Arab of the time, Lawrence of Arabia, and Britain?

nazis. i have never heard of isreali death camps.

Israel itself hasn't done anything that is comparable with the Nazis, but their were some Zionist groups that were on par with fascists, like Irgun, Kach, or the Kahane Chai

Wow, you are getting less rational by the second.What now? Jews wanted a state. The were offered land. They declined. So they didn't just want a state, the wanted Palestine.

We must start facing facts. Comparing Israel to the Nazis is childish.

First of the most obvious flaw is the fact that you became a Nazi by choice, thus accepting, at least partially, blame for the atrocities commited by "your" party. You do not choose to become an isreali, you are born one. Sure. you can become one by moving there, or you can quit being one by moving. The difference is vast, and political affiliation and nationalities is not comparable.

Second, while it is true that Israel have started countless wars, and that they have murdered (mass) Palistinians, this does not change the fact that what the Germans did was exponantionally worse. I do not buy into the whole "gas ovens" (wich couldnt have been used due to insulation problems among other things), nor the 6 million figure (has NO basis in reality). That is neither here nor there, the fact is that they systimatically imprisoned and murdered millions of Jews. They caused the deaths of 26 millions Russians (with a whole lot of help from stalin tough).

Third and by far most important. The Nazis systematicly murdered the Jews DELIBIRATLY. There reasons for doing so where, to kill them. They where killing for the sake of killing. The Israelis are doing so to protecting themselves from attacks.

Fourth. Might makes right. The jews can, and the Nazis couldnt.

What now? Jews wanted a state. The were offered land. They declined. So they didn't just want a state, the wanted Palestine.

I guess what the land looked like did not factor into it?

No, Hamas cannot tolerate even the existence of Israel, they will not stop until every Jew is dead and Israel is destroyed.

Israel breeds groups like Hamas. Regardless of what their stated goals are, if israel stops the occupation and Palestine becomes a state, Hamas will have less of a reason to continue attacks and also have less of a case in recruiting new members.

What now? Jews wanted a state. The were offered land. They declined. So they didn't just want a state, the wanted Palestine.

They were given a land in Siberia, would you move into a gulag?

I was remarking on your claim that the creation of Israel was some sort of racist conspiracy against the Arabs.

What now? Jews wanted a state. The were offered land. They declined. So they didn't just want a state, the wanted Palestine.

They wanted a state in the land that meant something to them.

How do you think the Kurds would feel if you gave them a state in Northern Finland. Northen Finland means nothing to the Kurds, its not where they are from

Israel stops their actions, and perhaps they can avoid violence being done to them.

What about the CURRENT cease-fire? The Israelis are not doing anything and for 3 weeks the Palestinians will not stop shooting on Sderot, even though they agreed to the cease-fire. Israel will not take it for long and will respond, which then of course you, the UN and the rest of the world will condemn Israel and compare it to the Nazis.

Israel breeds groups like Hamas. Regardless of what their stated goals are, if israel stops the occupation and Palestine becomes a state, Hamas will have less of a reason to continue attacks and also have less of a case in recruiting new members.

Hamas would still exist and do what they can to destroy Israel. Come on Sovietstan. Don't tell me you believe all that you are typing!

They were given a land in Siberia, would you move into a gulag?

I was remarking on your claim that the creation of Israel was some sort of racist conspiracy against the Arabs.

Heh, I don't think he wants any information that will make the Jews look less "evil". Don't bother.

I can't believe how this thread never ends.... truly amazing. :)

Israel breeds groups like Hamas. Regardless of what their stated goals are, if israel stops the occupation and Palestine becomes a state, Hamas will have less of a reason to continue attacks and also have less of a case in recruiting new members.

I definitely would agree that it would weaken them, make it more difficult for them to recruit. But I predict that they would continue attacking Israel.

Israel breeds groups like Hamas. Regardless of what their stated goals are, if israel stops the occupation and Palestine becomes a state, Hamas will have less of a reason to continue attacks and also have less of a case in recruiting new members.

Hammas and the surounding Arab states have repeadly made it their claim that they want to see Israel destroied, even before 1967. Israel's mere existance angers the Arab states and militant groups. Thats what is so pathetic, they cannot accept anyone who isnt them.

They were given a land in Siberia, would you move into a gulag? If you really want a state and you are offered land, you will take it. Otherwise it must be assumed your motives are different.

I was remarking on your claim that the creation of Israel was some sort of racist conspiracy against the Arabs.That's called Zionism. The call for a Jewish state in Palestine regardless of all circumstances.

When the Ottoman Empire ended and a mandate was set up for the Middle East by the League of Nations and the region was divided into spheres of interest, there were only roughly 80000 Jews in Palestine along with 70000 Christians and half a million Muslims/Arabs. So why would there be a need for a Jewish state when only around 11% of the population was Jewish?
You realise by this reasoning the Jews would never get their state anywhere, right?

What now? Jews wanted a state. The were offered land. They declined. So they didn't just want a state, the wanted Palestine.
Yes... wonderful land. How evil of the Israelis for declining.
The geography and climate of Birobidzhan were harsh, the landscape largely swampland, and any new settlers would have to build their lives from scratch. Some have even claimed that Stalin was also motivated by anti-Semitism in selecting Birobidzhan: he wanted to keep the Jews as far away from the centers of power as possible.

Israel breeds groups like Hamas. Regardless of what their stated goals are, if israel stops the occupation and Palestine becomes a state, Hamas will have less of a reason to continue attacks and also have less of a case in recruiting new members.

So all the wrong things, all the killing on both sides are the Israelis' fault. Thank you for your unbiased point of view.

Hammas and the surounding Arab states have repeadly made it their claim that they want to see Israel destroied, even before 1967. Israel's mere existance angers the Arab states and militant groups. Thats what is so pathetic, they cannot accept anyone who isnt them.

Not every Arab state has made that claim. Jordan, Egypt and until recently, Lebanon all signed peace treaties with Israel and wanted to move on with their lives. Palestine still is that way, but given the state of their nation I really am not surprised.

If you really want a state and you are offered land, you will take it. Otherwise it must be assumed your motives are different.

Factor in climate and everything else and you arrive at the answer that they gave the USSR (who did not like the Jews any more than Hitler did)

That's called Zionism. The call for a Jewish state in Palestine regardless of all circumstances.

And yet, a Palestinian state was also called for where most of the people were Palestinian. :rolleyes: Failed history 101 I see.

They wanted a state in the land that meant something to them.
How do you think the Kurds would feel if you gave them a state in Northern Finland. Northen Finland means nothing to the Kurds, its not where they are fromThen their need obviously wasn't grave enough. "mean something to them", if that was a criterion: Palestine meant a lot more to the Palestinian Arabs than it meant to immigrant Jews.

If you really want a state and you are offered land, you will take it. Otherwise it must be assumed your motives are different.

They wanted a state in their HOME. ISRAEL. If you were to take the Basque and give them a state in south western Manchuria I don't think they would like it.

So all the wrong things, all the killing on both sides are the Israelis' fault. Thank you for your unbiased point of view.Without Israel there would be no killing. As simple as that.

They wanted a state in their HOME. ISRAEL. If you were to take the Basque and give them a state in south western Manchuria I don't think they would like it.

I doubt the Manchurians would like it either ;)

If you really want a state and you are offered land, you will take it. Otherwise it must be assumed your motives are different.
Or that you are smart enough to wait for land that is actually livable.

That's called Zionism. The call for a Jewish state in Palestine regardless of all circumstances.

And the motive for zionism was creating a jewish homeland in palestine, not the wholesale destruction of the arab race.

Without Israel there would be no killing. As simple as that.

Oh yes. Brilliant. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. :rolleyes:

Then their need obviously wasn't grave enough. "mean something to them", if that was a criterion: Palestine meant a lot more to the Palestinian Arabs than it meant to immigrant Jews.

Would you live in such a climate as what the USSR offered?

Without Israel there would be no killing. As simple as that.
:headbang: Without Palestinians there would be no killing! Without Jews, there would have been no holocaust! [NOT comparing Palestinians to Nazis :rolleyes:] Without Americans, there would have been no 9/11!

Just to illustrate that this is a ludicrous argument.

And the motive for zionism was creating a jewish homeland in palestine, not the wholesale destruction of the arab race.

Here here.

They wanted a state in their HOME. ISRAEL. If you were to take the Basque and give them a state in south western Manchuria I don't think they would like it.Israel isn't the immigrant Jews home. They had their homes elsewhere.

Then their need obviously wasn't grave enough. "mean something to them", if that was a criterion: Palestine meant a lot more to the Palestinian Arabs than it meant to immigrant Jews.

The land meaning something to them is only a part of the reason.

It clearly didnt mean enough to the Absentee landlords who allowed the Jews to build communities and cities on their land

It clearly didnt mean enough to the pesants in the area, who called themselves Syrians

It clearly had never meant enough for there to have ever been an independent political entity called Palestine

It clearly didnt mean enough since the name Palestine was not a name given to it by said Arabs, its not a name of self creation. If they cared so much for it, why did they not re name it when they conquered it. Thats what happened with Kariouan, why not Jerusalem.

It clearly didnt mean enough to them to win the war over it. The British won the war against the Ottoman Empire. That gives the British the right to decide what to do with it. And the reason they have right is the same reason the Ottoman empire had that right. The Ottomans had fought a war previously that had given them that area. The British then passed it up to the UN to do something with it, who agreed that self determination reasons that two states are needed there, one Jewish one Arab. The Jews were happy as they got something. The Arabs were angry that they didnt get everything

Without Israel there would be no killing. As simple as that.

Also without Arabs.
Whats your point?

Israel isn't the immigrant Jews home. They had their homes elsewhere.

No, they had no home. They were guests in other peoples country, but they had no country to call home

If the Jews should be happy to be guests in other peoples countries, then the Palestinas should be happy to be guests in Israel. Especially if they are protected under a democracy.

:headbang: Without Palestinians there would be no killing! Without Jews, there would have been no holocaust! [NOT comparing Palestinians to Nazis :rolleyes:] Without Americans, there would have been no 9/11!

Just to illustrate that this is a ludicrous argument.But Israel is the aggressor, not the victim. Israel is made up of those who came from outside. They claimed the land the Palestinians were tilling and tried to live from. They attacked the very existence of the small people there.

If the Jews should be happy to be guests in other peoples countries, then the Palestinas should be happy to be guests in Israel. Especially if they are protected under a democracy.

Take a look at some of the Refugee camps in Gaza, then call the Palestinians "Guests".

No, they had no home. They were guests in other peoples country, but they had no country to call home

If the Jews should be happy to be guests in other peoples countries, then the Palestinas should be happy to be guests in Israel. Especially if they are protected under a democracy.Guests? So you mean they never integrated? Well, however bad that may be, it's not the Arabs fault and thus there is no reason to punish Arabs by putting Jews into their homeland.

But Israel is the aggressor, not the victim. Israel is made up of those who came from outside. They claimed the land the Palestinians were tilling and tried to live from. They attacked the very existence of the small people there.

Israel is not the agressor. Israel never ever started a single war or entered Gaza without provocation.

Take a look at some of the Refugee camps in Gaza, then call the Palestinians "Guests".?? Is that supposed to be a parallel to Jewish living conditions as "guests" in Europe?