NationStates Jolt Archive

errr..... did you read the bolded parts of the 68% most are second and third generation.... or is that not self explanatory?and the first 'generation' immigrants don't count or what?

and the first 'generation' immigrants don't count or what?

sigh....

of course they count, why would you make a stupid point like that?

but a MAJORITY which would mean over 50% of the total are 2nd, 3rd generation. so if 68% are born there, and a MAJORITY of 2nd and 3rd generation, that means over 34%+ are 2nd and 3rd generation. So 34%- are first generation.

Have you actually read the link you supplied?

.

Year Arabs % Jews % Total
1870 367,224 98 7,000 2 375,000
1893 469,000 98 10,000 2 497,000
1912 525,000 93 40,000 6 565,000
1920 542,000 90 61,000 10 603,000
1925 598,000 83 120,000 17 719,000
1930 763,000 82 165,000 18 928,000
1935 886,000 71 355,000 29 1,241,000
1940 1,014,000 69 463,000 31 1,478,000
1946 1,237,000 65 608,000 35 1,845,000

looks like a substantial part of the population of the area was originally immigrant, INCLUDING arabs.No, why? The population growth is normal. And Arabs moving around in Arab land are no immigrants. But Jews who came from outside the Middle East are.

sigh....

of course they count, why would you make a stupid point like that?

but a MAJORITY which would mean over 50% of the total are 2nd, 3rd generation. so if 68% are born there, and a MAJORITY of 2nd and 3rd generation, that means over 34%+ are 2nd and 3rd generation. So 34%- are first generation.The offspring of trespassers who continue the trespassing are equally guilty.

No, why? And Arabs moving around in Arab land are no immigrants. But Jews who came from outside the Middle East are.

how convenient.

ok let's argue definitions then. So what is an arab?
quoted from wiki:

* Islamic tradition: The Qur'an does not define who is an Arab but there is a verse in the Qur'an stating "there is no difference between an Arab or an Ajam (meaning a non-Arabic speaker), except by their God-fearingness" . The prophet Muhammed also noted that an Arab is anyone who speaks Arabic.
* Ethnic identity: someone who considers him or herself to be an Arab (regardless of racial or ethnic origin) and is recognized as such by others.
* Linguistic: someone whose first language is Arabic (including any of its varieties); this definition covers more than 250 million people. Arabic belongs to the Semitic family of languages.
* Genealogical: someone who can trace his or her ancestry back to the original inhabitants of the Arabian Peninsula and the Syrian Desert.
* Political: someone who is a resident or citizen of a country where Arabic is one of the official languages or the national language, or is a member of the Arab League or is part of the wider Arab world; this definition would cover more than 300 million people, but it is rather simplistic and rigid in that it excludes the entire Diaspora but includes indigenous or migrant minorities.

so which of these are you using?

If its islamic tradition then you realise arabic is an official language in israel? Which legaly can be used in the knesset, etc...

If its along ethnic lines, there are 1.500.000 israeli citizen who classify themselves as arab. This does not included the Druze who are arab or Mizrahim.

If its linguistic, well arabic is an official language so its a first language

If its genealogical, i think most people would have a hard time with this one...

If its Political, well covered that with the national language bit...


so which is it?

The offspring of trespassers who continue the trespassing are equally guilty.

are they?

which law or ruling are you using for that one?

So most people in the americas are tresspassing. Most people of germanic/celtic descent in europe are tresspassing. All arabs of Arabian descent are tresspassing outside of saudi arabia.

Actually the ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE EARTH, except for ethiopians are tresspassing?

are they?

which law or ruling are you using for that one?

So most people in the americas are tresspassing. Most people of germanic/celtic descent in europe are tresspassing. All arabs of Arabian descent are tresspassing outside of saudi arabia.

Actually the ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE EARTH, except for ethiopians are tresspassing?

Yep. :)

are they?

which law or ruling are you using for that one?

So most people in the americas are tresspassing. Most people of germanic/celtic descent in europe are tresspassing. All arabs of Arabian descent are tresspassing outside of saudi arabia.

Actually the ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE EARTH, except for ethiopians are tresspassing?Yes they are. Anyone with a sense of justice will instantly realize that. Jews had no justification to demand a state in an already populated land. Tell me again: why wasn't Pennsylvania divided in two parts to give one to Jews? Or Wales?

Yep. :)

SCREW YOU TRESSPASSER!!!!!!:sniper: :mp5: :headbang: :upyours:

damn wheres wilgrove when you need him..

WILGROVE!!! TRESSPASSERS!!!!
where are the conservative catholic with a 12 gage when you need one

Yes they are. Anyone with a sense of justice will instantly realize that. Jews had no justification to demand a state in an already populated land. Tell me again: why wasn't Pennsylvania divided in two parts to give one to Jews? Or Wales?

Probably becuse Pittsburg isn't particularly holy to them. :p

SCREW YOU TRESSPASSER!!!!!!:sniper: :mp5: :headbang: :upyours:

damn wheres wilgrove when you need him..

WILGROVE!!! TRESSPASSERS!!!!
where are the conservative catholic with a 12 gage when you need one

*sneaks more people in through the back door and escapes in the chaos* :D

Yes they are. Anyone with a sense of justice will instantly realize that. Jews had no justification to demand a state in an already populated land. Tell me again: why wasn't Pennsylvania divided in two parts to give one to Jews? Or Wales?

why should they be? were those the lands requested? were there any potential claims based on history, culture or any other excuse given?

The fact is your argument is redundant. The "jews" are there. They have done nothing to be compared to nazies. Any argument you use can be reversed and applied to the arabs. and vice versa.
They are there. they are there due to a UN resolution. You can claim they are tresspassers because most have only been there for a 100 years. The same can be said for most palestinians there.
You can claim it was muslim land, which is in error because there have been christians, jews and durze there a lot longer.
You can claim most muslims were kicked out if not they would be the majority. Same applies for the reverse, it would be a majority christian or jewish if the population had not been originally invaded over the centuries.

In the end they are there. They will remain there. and until the other governments and organisations in the area deal with this there is only going to be strife.

Nazi... pity because German did not react quick enough.

Israel ? such a small country, smaller than Sudan.
But Sudan what kinda country is this ?
But who cares it no Sudanese at the top of your government...

In the Holy State of Jesuites no Israel, no Sudanese, only a few lost Isrish souls and lotta nice women with a very good High Priest... a bit nazi sometimes... mainly with Poldavians and noisy neighbours.

Nazi... pity because German did not react quick enough.

Israel ? such a small country, smaller than Sudan.
But Sudan what kinda country is this ?
But who cares it no Sudanese at the top of your government...

In the Holy State of Jesuites no Israel, no Sudanese, only a few lost Isrish souls and lotta nice women with a very good High Priest... a bit nazi sometimes... mainly with Poldavians and noisy neighbours.

bravo

thats the most nonsensical statement on this thread to date

why should they be? were those the lands requested? were there any potential claims based on history, culture or any other excuse given?

The fact is your argument is redundant. The "jews" are there. They have done nothing to be compared to nazies. Any argument you use can be reversed and applied to the arabs. and vice versa.
They are there. they are there due to a UN resolution. You can claim they are tresspassers because most have only been there for a 100 years. The same can be said for most palestinians there.
You can claim it was muslim land, which is in error because there have been christians, jews and durze there a lot longer.
You can claim most muslims were kicked out if not they would be the majority. Same applies for the reverse, it would be a majority christian or jewish if the population had not been originally invaded over the centuries.

In the end they are there. They will remain there. and until the other governments and organisations in the area deal with this there is only going to be strife.Just because Jews 'requested' land in the Middle East they had a right to it? What a BS. Hitler requested the world for his rule, but I doubt this constituted any right for him.
Jews could have requested land elsewhere but they refused any other options.
There is no point in denying that after the downfall of the Ottoman Empire the Arabs should have been allowed self rule. There was no need to slice up the region into spheres of European interests, or breaking the promises given to the Arabs by giving away their land to foreigners over their heads.
Even the British PM has admitted that it was an error to give in to the Zionists.

bravo
thats the most nonsensical statement on this thread to dateI am confident that you will soon beat this.

Allegheny County 2, you have to be the worst multiple post offender I have ever seen.

Now this is an Ad Homen attack. What is that supposed to mean?

Oh yes it is.

Only in your world it is.

They have done nothing to be compared to nazies.

while i dont buy into the OP', the simple fact is the third reich and zionism are both based on the concepts of racial supremecy.

so whether we like it or not, immediatly there are comparisons to be made.

Just because Jews 'requested' land in the Middle East they had a right to it? What a BS. Hitler requested the world for his rule, but I doubt this constituted any right for him.
Jews could have requested land elsewhere but they refused any other options.
There is no point in denying that after the downfall of the Ottoman Empire the Arabs should have been allowed self rule. There was no need to slice up the region into spheres of European interests, or breaking the promises given to the Arabs by giving away their land to foreigners over their heads.

Did i say they have a right to it?
Your poor reading skills are not going to help you win arguments you know

The hitler comment is foolish. So why make the comparison?

Yes they could have requested land elsewhere, but they did not. No the european nations should not a sliced up the region in spheres or interest, but they did.
And the only reason israel was formed was due to the UN resolution.


I am confident that you will soon beat this.

wow. you are quite foolish. If you reviewed most of the posts i put on this thread, i've done my best to be objective. Which means defending both sides of the argument as there are 2 sides.
But i see there is not point helping someone like you out. I'll have a look at this thread on monday and see how much better you fair.

I'd say good luck, but considering your arguments up till this point, it would be wasted

Probably becuse Pittsburg isn't particularly holy to them. :p

And its a crappy city to boot. And I can say that with authority for I have been there numerous times :p

while i dont buy into the OP', the simple fact is the third reich and zionism are both based on the concepts of racial supremecy.

so whether we like it or not, immediatly there are comparisons to be made.

nationalism i'd agree with. racial supremecy is a dangerous concept when talking about jews, as they vary alot on ethnic backgrouds, etc... just look at the beta jews (somalian jews)

Did i say they have a right to it?
Your poor reading skills are not going to help you win arguments you know

The hitler comment is foolish. So why make the comparison?

Yes they could have requested land elsewhere, but they did not. No the european nations should not a sliced up the region in spheres or interest, but they did.
And the only reason israel was formed was due to the UN resolution.
The only reason Israel was formed was because Jews wanted it and the nations outside the Middle East had a bad conscience because of what happened to Jews in Europe.
The point remains: there was NO justification to give away Arab land to foreigners.
As I asked before: why was no referendum held in Palestine over the partition plan? I suppose you know the answer.

wow. you are quite foolish. If you reviewed most of the posts i put on this thread, i've done my best to be objective. Which means defending both sides of the argument as there are 2 sides.
But i see there is not point helping someone like you out. I'll have a look at this thread on monday and see how much better you fair.

I'd say good luck, but considering your arguments up till this point, it would be wastedYou haven't put any arguments in here so far. Let alone objective ones. You are strongly supporting the Jewish intrusion into Palestine. That's an injustice and can never be undone or even justified (well, in fact it could not be undone, but corrected). There are no arguments for this, except if they are entirely subjective and thus invalid.

I guess someone has not read up on history. Jews were their before the arabs legally speaking.

And the Canaanites were there before the Jews.

nationalism i'd agree with. racial supremecy is a dangerous concept when talking about jews, as they vary alot on ethnic backgrouds, etc... just look at the beta jews (somalian jews)

how many times have i read on this site that the jews are a race?

whatever encapsulates the concept that a certain group belive they are entitled to their own lands at the expense of those living there then. its nasty and has echoes.

The only reason Israel was formed was because Jews wanted it and the nations outside the Middle East had a bad conscience because of what happened to Jews in Europe.
The point remains: there was NO justification to give away Arab land to foreigners.
As I asked before: why was no referendum held in Palestine over the partition plan? I suppose you know the answer.

You haven't put any arguments in here so far. Let alone objective ones. You are strongly supporting the Jewish intrusion into Palestine. That's an injustice and can never be undone or even justified (well, in fact it could not be undone, but corrected). There are no arguments for this, except if they are entirely subjective and thus invalid.

and so...you think that 50 years later we should what, drive the Jews, who have built the only truly thriving nation IN the middle east out so that the Palestinians, who attacked them after they bought land to live on, whcih more or less started this whole mess, can have all that land back? Fine let the palestinians compensate the Jews for all they;ve built and will ose there when we move them to...where was it you want them to live? I dunno. You sound like you could give a shit what happens to the jews now. Is it just that yu want to punish them for wanting a place where they can live and feel safe, and it's been at the expense of the palestinians who have attacked them long before isreal became a nation on land they legally bought, simply because they were Jews?
you make no sense to me. Maybe someone else can figure out what your grand solution is. In the meantime, I suspect the jews will continue to whack da mole, and the Palestinians will continue to attack da jews for whatee=ver reason they can find, like they always have.

Sadly, if the other middle eastern states would quit supporting the Palestinians, and the Palestinians would accept the Jewish state and the help it could offer, they would be better off in the long run. Butthanks to people like you who continue to claim that the jews are as bad as the Nazis, and should be driven FULLY to the ends of the earth 'cuz dey be bad, why, this might never end! The arms dealers just love ya, I am sure.

and you have never really answered the issue of the fact that the jewish homeland was indeed WHERE ISTARL IS NOW. And that Palestinians took it from them waaaay back when. So how do you deal with that argument? again simply by ignoring it as not pertinant to 2006? Well, neither is the 1948 UN decision. There IS a jewish state, the Palestinians have repeatedly screamed at the top of their lungs that only by killing jews can they be happy. Sounds like they would rathe rkill jews than have a homeland to me. dontcha hate my spelling? *giggles*

how many times have i read on this site that the jews are a race?

whatever encapsulates the concept that a certain group belive they are entitled to their own lands at the expense of those living there then. its nasty and has echoes.

i assume what you mean by echoes is terrorists and extra fun violence?
your from ireland, yes? you know what i mean.

if we are going to give them a holy land why not in russia? oh wait that been done before, they didnt like it. but its still there for them.

And the Canaanites were there before the Jews.Jews came there after the area became Persian. An the area was never altogether Jewish after that. Just as it was never altogether Israelite before the Babylonian Exile.

Jews came there after the area became Persian. An the area was never altogether Jewish after that. Just as it was never altogether Israelite before the Babylonian Exile.

Everyone in the world is on top of someone elses land anyway. The long history of humanity is one group of humans kicking out another group and settling on their land. Hardly a limited action that the Jews can be credited for.

and so...you think that 50 years later we should what, drive the Jews, who have built the only truly thriving nation IN the middle east out so that the Palestinians, who attacked them after they bought land to live on, whcih more or less started this whole mess, can have all that land back? Fine let the palestinians compensate the Jews for all they;ve built and will ose there when we move them to...where was it you want them to live? I dunno. You sound like you could give a shit what happens to the jews now. Is it just that yu want to punish them for wanting a place where they can live and feel safe, and it's been at the expense of the palestinians who have attacked them long before isreal became a nation on land they legally bought, simply because they were Jews?
you make no sense to me. Maybe someone else can figure out what your grand solution is. In the meantime, I suspect the jews will continue to whack da mole, and the Palestinians will continue to attack da jews for whatee=ver reason they can find, like they always have.

Sadly, if the other middle eastern states would quit supporting the Palestinians, and the Palestinians would accept the Jewish state and the help it could offer, they would be better off in the long run. Butthanks to people like you who continue to claim that the jews are as bad as the Nazis, and should be driven FULLY to the ends of the earth 'cuz dey be bad, why, this might never end! The arms dealers just love ya, I am sure.

and you have never really answered the issue of the fact that the jewish homeland was indeed WHERE ISTARL IS NOW. And that Palestinians took it from them waaaay back when. So how do you deal with that argument? again simply by ignoring it as not pertinant to 2006? Well, neither is the 1948 UN decision. There IS a jewish state, the Palestinians have repeatedly screamed at the top of their lungs that only by killing jews can they be happy. Sounds like they would rathe rkill jews than have a homeland to me. dontcha hate my spelling? *giggles*Time does not unmake the injustice of Jews coming to foreign land with the fixed aim to create a state there regardless who was already living there. They were and remain invaders and Palestinian Arabs have every right to fight them by all means they deem necessary. You would do the same if a foreigner came to take your home, even after 50 years, you hypocrite.
And what the Jews have built in the are is of no relevance, probably Arabs would have done the same, unfortunately we will never know that.

And the Canaanites were there before the Jews.

Which I've stated before but UB can not get that through his/her thick skull.

Jews came there after the area became Persian. An the area was never altogether Jewish after that. Just as it was never altogether Israelite before the Babylonian Exile.

I am calling Bullshit. Go back and learn history. The Cannanites were their first then the Jews, then the arabs. If you cannot understand this, then I prey to God that you are not a Histor major.

Everyone in the world is on top of someone elses land anyway. The long history of humanity is one group of humans kicking out another group and settling on their land. Hardly a limited action that the Jews can be credited for.What a BS. Arabs have always lived there. They are the merged descendants of basically everyone who ever dwelt in the region, including Hebrews. The Jews who came there en masse to claim a state after and even before the downfall of the Ottoman Empire however were basically Europeans, in any case foreigners to the Middle East. You could have given them half of Pennsylvania instead of half of Palestine (and they even wanted what is Jordan today).

How? Article 49 of the Third Convention still prohibited Annexation of Territory gained in war. The Fourth Convention Art. 49, para 6 CLARIFIED the position to include "creeping" annexation. Read.

Further,various treaties between 1907 and 1919 provided harsh remedies against nations that annexed territory in war. The Second Geneva Convention was not clear on the subject so it was made abundantly clear through independent enforcement in harsh terms that such behavior was beyond the pale.

Which Geneva convention are you reading:

Article 49 3rd:

ARTICLE 49

The Detaining Power may utilize the labour of prisoners of war who are physically fit, taking into account their age, sex, rank and physical aptitude, and with a view particularly to maintaining them in a good state of physical and mental health.

Non-commissioned officers who are prisoners of war shall only be required to do supervisory work. Those not so required may ask for other suitable work which shall, so far as possible, be found for them.

If officers or persons of equivalent status ask for suitable work, it shall be found for them, so far as possible, but they may in no circumstances be compelled to work.

http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/lawofwar/geneva03.htm#art49

I am calling Bullshit. Go back and learn history. The Cannanites were their first then the Jews, then the arabs. If you cannot understand this, then I prey to God that you are not a Histor major.1. Don't confuse Jews with Israelites or even Hebrews.
2. Arabs are descended also from Canaanites and everybody else who had ever lived there, including Hebrews.

What a BS. Arabs have always lived there. They are the merged descendants of basically everyone who ever dwelt in the region, including Hebrews. The Jews who came there en masse to claim a state after and even before the downfall of the Ottoman Empire however were basically Europeans, in any case foreigners to the Middle East. You could have given them half of Pennsylvania instead of half of Palestine (and they even wanted what is Jordan today).

So like I said earlier, you believe it's ok to ethnically cleanse other people/areas but not Arabs.

No, no blatant racism there.

What a BS. Arabs have always lived there. They are the merged descendants of basically everyone who ever dwelt in the region, including Hebrews. The Jews who came there en masse to claim a state after and even before the downfall of the Ottoman Empire however were basically Europeans, in any case foreigners to the Middle East. You could have given them half of Pennsylvania instead of half of Palestine (and they even wanted what is Jordan today).

I wouldn't mind some proof that in the mass migrations of peoples in the thousands of years of human history that the Arab tribes were the first to settle and never shoved anyone else out. I find that highly unlikely. I would love to read an arguement that some group is living on land that they got to first and then never left. That would be quite fascinating that they would be able to hold on to it from all outsiders for all of human history.

I am calling Bullshit. Go back and learn history. The Cannanites were their first then the Jews, then the arabs. If you cannot understand this, then I prey to God that you are not a Histor major.

He's obviously not, as his grasp of history has shown. I find it funny he's told me to go back to school for it (I'm working on my MA) when he was completely wrong (again).

So like I said earlier, you believe it's ok to ethnically cleanse other people/areas but not Arabs.
No, no blatant racism there.No it's not. 1. Jews are not a race. 2. They are not to be removed because they are Jews but because they are (ideologically motivated) foreign invaders who don't belong there.

He's obviously not, as his grasp of history has shown. I find it funny he's told me to go back to school for it (I'm working on my MA) when he was completely wrong (again).I am in no way wrong. Maybe an MA of your country just isn't worth much.

and so...you think that 50 years later we should what, drive the Jews, who have built the only truly thriving nation IN the middle east out so that the Palestinians, who attacked them after they bought land to live on,*

Only 7% of the land was bought. I suggest you get that figure fixed into your head before you spout more nonsense.


attacked them long before isreal became a nation on land they legally bought, simply because they were Jews? ,*

7%. Before 8, after 6.

Time does not unmake the injustice of Jews coming to foreign land with the fixed aim to create a state there regardless who was already living there. They were and remain invaders and Palestinian Arabs have every right to fight them by all means they deem necessary. You would do the same if a foreigner came to take your home, even after 50 years, you hypocrite.
And what the Jews have built in the are is of no relevance, probably Arabs would have done the same, unfortunately we will never know that.


as I said, by your arguement, since there are no cananites left, why, the jews are indeed the "original" inhabitants. So we should deport palestinians en masse. Maybe you would like the North Pole? I don't think anybody is there yet. MAybe with the whole global warming thing.


Serious dude, I don't really disagree with you. It;s just that you are taking a really one sided tack to an issue that isn't one sided. You can't condemn the UN on one hand and then demand that its resolutions be heeded only when it helps your cause, tho I know most nations DO (especially America)


and NO I would not attack someone who moved here, nought land, and improved it. I would welcome him and thank him for improving our country. MAybe that's the problem. You see them as invaders, even when they paid for the land that started the original fight. I see them as people who immigrated and dedicated themselves to making a better place. Which of us has a better outlook overall?

I wouldn't mind some proof that in the mass migrations of peoples in the thousands of years of human history that the Arab tribes were the first to settle and never shoved anyone else out. I find that highly unlikely. I would love to read an arguement that some group is living on land that they got to first and then never left. That would be quite fascinating that they would be able to hold on to it from all outsiders for all of human history.

Quite possibly the Basques, as the language is unique.

I wouldn't mind some proof that in the mass migrations of peoples in the thousands of years of human history that the Arab tribes were the first to settle and never shoved anyone else out. I find that highly unlikely. I would love to read an arguement that some group is living on land that they got to first and then never left. That would be quite fascinating that they would be able to hold on to it from all outsiders for all of human history.There were no mass migrations in Palestine. And in the spread of Islam only changed their religion, not their descent.

No it's not. 1. Jews are not a race. 2. They are not to be removed because they are Jews but because they are (ideologically motivated) foreign invaders who don't belong there.

Nice dodge. Was I talking specifically about the Jews? Nope. You'ld have to ethnically cleanse wherever they went. You are fine w/ that as long as it's not Arabs. That's racism.

As for you and whats his face claiming the map I posted earlier was "misleading", maybe you both should look up what nations are members of the ARAB LEAGUE.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Arab-Israeli_Map1.GIF
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_league

Quite possibly the Basques, as the language is unique.The Basques of Palestine, huh?

The Basques of Palestine, huh?

When he said "some group" I presumed he was speaking generally.

There were no mass migrations in Palestine. And in the spread of Islam only changed their religion, not their descent.

BS called. Happened over and over. Palestine has been a homeland for four peoples I can think of. And the spread of islam did indeed change who many peoples were. When you get told be one of us or die, welll...

I am in no way wrong. Maybe an MA of your country just isn't worth much.


And the classic US bash when the facts don't support your version of the world. Pretty weak.

You've been wrong over and over.

.

You've been wrong over and over.

As has the OP. Doesnt make you right though.

Nice dodge. Was I talking specifically about the Jews? Nope. You'ld have to ethnically cleanse wherever they went. You are fine w/ that as long as it's not Arabs. That's racism.

As for you and whats his face claiming the map I posted earlier was "misleading", maybe you both should look up what nations are members of the ARAB LEAGUE.That map is much different from the one you posted before, asswipe. And you were specifically talking about Jews, since they are the only "other people" around there. As I said, they can have Pennsylvania or Wales.

There were no mass migrations in Palestine. And in the spread of Islam only changed their religion, not their descent.

If you want to go by the theory of evoloution then humans got their "spark" of intelligence in Africa. As they left and spread around the world, these people will have gone through the Palestine area. The idea that there has not been a succession of tribes being kicked out and replaced, kicked out and replaced again is ridiculous.

Quite possibly the Basques, as the language is unique.

If I remember right, the Basques were one of the barbarian tribes that came in during the collapse of the Roman Empire. Could be wrong though, perhaps they are an exception and have always been there. I still find it unlikely though.

if they decide to sell Israel to the Palestinians at a fair market value and buy land there, why, I am sure we would love to have such a hardworking, generally decent people. Meantime, I am still thinking we should be looking at the North Pole for the Palestinians, since they demand the total destruction of the Jewish people, who have only asked to be left alone over and over.

Hmmm...this thread is going in circles I think.

As has the OP. Doesnt make you right though.

So there weren't 10 million copies of Mein Kampf in Germany? The map I posted didn't consist of mostly Arab Nations? The area had more than 10% Jews in the 1940's. These are all facts I've shown against UB's non-evidence.

Perhaps you should read the entire thread before you make your little personal attacks.

And the classic US bash when the facts don't support your version of the world. Pretty weak.
You've been wrong over and over.No I haven't. And I didn't even know you're from the US. Pretty weak. But no wonder you hate Arabs and cannot understand why they feel abused by the West. Your country's invasion of Iraq demonstrates that very clearly.

So there weren't 10 million copies of Mein Kampf in Germany? The map I posted didn't consist of mostly Arab Nations? The area had more than 10% Jews in the 1940's. These are all facts I've shown against UB's non-evidence.

Perhaps you should read the entire thread before you make your little personal attacks.

WARNING: THREAD CONTAMINATED

*klaxons sound*

If you want to go by the theory of evoloution then humans got their "spark" of intelligence in Africa. As they left and spread around the world, these people will have gone through the Palestine area. The idea that there has not been a succession of tribes being kicked out and replaced, kicked out and replaced again is ridiculous.

If I remember right, the Basques were one of the barbarian tribes that came in during the collapse of the Roman Empire. Could be wrong though, perhaps they are an exception.Very funny. Citing migrations of 60000 years ago to justify Jewish/Zionist intrusion into Palestine. Ridicule, my lad.

That map is much different from the one you posted before, asswipe. And you were specifically talking about Jews, since they are the only "other people" around there. As I said, they can have Pennsylvania or Wales.

Now I'm as "asswipe". How cute. Are you denying that it still contains the majority of the map I posted earlier? That's not "much different".

No, I was talking about you being OK with ethnically cleansing anywhere else BUT where Isreal is today to give the Jews a homeland.

I guess being disingenous is minor when it comes to someone who supports the murder of women and children because they don't "belong" there.

So there weren't 10 million copies of Mein Kampf in Germany? The map I posted didn't consist of mostly Arab Nations? The area had more than 10% Jews in the 1940's. These are all facts I've shown against UB's non-evidence.

Perhaps you should read the entire thread before you make your little personal attacks.

I was speaking more of your earlier attempts to deny mass expulsions and portray the Palestinians as bonafide Nazis. As UBs problems seem to be with Jews, I generally ignore him and whatever hes on about.

The area had more than 10% Jews in the 1940's.The Jewish intrusion started way before the 1940's.

Very funny. Citing migrations of 60000 years ago to justify Jewish/Zionist intrusion into Palestine. Ridicule, my lad.

60000 years ago? Really?

no different than claiming an occurance 50 years ago is pertinant. At least the 50 years ago issue was an internationally accepted (althogh debated) happening. Although you obviously don't like it, taht's the way of elections and suchlike. You vote, you takes yer chances. Unless you decide to start shooting. Which only 3rd worlders really do because they have no faith taht they will ever get their chance to run things. If the Pallys would just get in the game they would be surprised.

you still dont like My idea of the North Pole? Well, what if we simply bult them a spa resort in...i dunno...Chernobyl?

The Jewish intrusion started way before the 1940's.


More racism.

Yet 10% is what you quoted for the period and still haven't shown when that number was accurate.

Keep trying.

no different than claiming an occurance 50 years ago is pertinant. At least the 50 years ago issue was an internationally accepted (althogh debated) happening. Although you obviously don't like it, taht's the way of elections and suchlike. You vote, you takes yer chances. Unless you decide to start shooting. Which only 3rd worlders really do because they have no faith taht they will ever get their chance to run things. If the Pallys would just get in the game they would be surprised.

you still dont like My idea of the North Pole? Well, what if we simply bult them a spa resort in...i dunno...Chernobyl?

Seeing as those in the occupied territories have no vote, what should they then do?

if they decide to sell Israel to the Palestinians at a fair market value and buy land there, why, I am sure we would love to have such a hardworking, generally decent people. Meantime, I am still thinking we should be looking at the North Pole for the Palestinians, since they demand the total destruction of the Jewish people, who have only asked to be left alone over and over.

Hmmm...this thread is going in circles I think.

Israel hasn't made it any easier on itself by its illegal holding of the West Bank and its violations of basic human decency in allowing to let the Palestinians live in those camps. And then they kill many Palestinian civilians not just like the suicide bombers kill Israeli civilians. Israel is as much of a part of a circle of violence.

No I haven't. And I didn't even know you're from the US. Pretty weak. But no wonder you hate Arabs and cannot understand why they feel abused by the West. Your country's invasion of Iraq demonstrates that very clearly.

So all American universities are part of some conspiracy to turn students into Arab hating graduates? Or perhaps we all simply blindly follow the extreme political right foolishness? Sounds to me you don't understand America and only choose to follow stereotypes.

I was speaking more of your earlier attempts to deny mass expulsions and portray the Palestinians as bonafide Nazis. As UBs problems seem to be with Jews, I generally ignore him and whatever hes on about.

Of course you were. Yet you make attacks against me then exxagerate what I was saying. And yet you call me "intellectually dishonest".

Now I'm as "asswipe". How cute. Are you denying that it still contains the majority of the map I posted earlier? That's not "much different".

No, I was talking about you being OK with ethnically cleansing anywhere else BUT where Isreal is today to give the Jews a homeland.

I guess being disingenous is minor when it comes to someone who supports the murder of women and children because they don't "belong" there.
The ethnic cleansing was and is still done by Israel, not Arabs. Palestinian Arabs are fighting to get back what's theirs. That's not ethnic cleansing.

Nazis - by a hair.

Israel is as much of a part of a circle of violence.It is the cause and starter of the circle of violence.

Very funny. Citing migrations of 60000 years ago to justify Jewish/Zionist intrusion into Palestine. Ridicule, my lad.

Who says I'm justifying the Jewish presense? I would question the Zionist migration to Israel but in the end they can justify their claim to the land as can other groups. And I cited the tens of thousands of years of human movement to try to explain that no group can claim ownership of land. They have all stolen it from someone else. It doesn't excuse more modern examples of doing so but I am not going to try to use it as an excuse for Arabs to blow up Jews. Simply doesn't work.

It is the cause and starter of the circle of violence.

Nope, wrong again. Why don't you blame the Ottomans or the UN (alternately supported though) or the UK or the mullahs who called for violence against Jews when the UK was causing the problems? Oh, right, you don't care about them.

Of course you were. Yet you make attacks against me then exxagerate what I was saying. And yet you call me "intellectually dishonest".

You mean the same people that allied themselves w/ Nazi Germany and supported the SS?

Thats what you stated. Clear implciation. And ignores the fact that Germany was given self government not long after ww2.

Israel hasn't made it any easier on itself by its illegal holding of the West Bank and its violations of basic human decency in allowing to let the Palestinians live in those camps. And then they kill many Palestinian civilians not just like the suicide bombers kill Israeli civilians. Israel is as much of a part of a circle of violence.

I know man. I have taken a reasonable tone with UB, but he seems stuck on "kill the Zionist hatemongering Fascist Jewbastards, so I decided to hold up the alternative. As I said earlier, this isn't a one sided issue. It's so comlex by now that it is barely describable. And yet, the Jews DO only seem to go nuts when the Pallys walk into a Bar Mitsfa and blof the vride out the window, along wit hteh rest of the weddding.

All I have been saying is if the Pallys would get over the whole Kill Jews thing "which doens't seem likely in a society where babies where bomber suits cause its cute) then the Jews would calm down, and the Pallys could calm down, and hopefully some talks could star again. Sadly every time the Jews try to take it down a notchthe Pallys crank it up two more. Which leads me to believe its not necessarily the Jews fault, even if they are baaaaad people who shold be exterminatged as UB seems to want.

It is the cause and starter of the circle of violence.

Nope, that would be the Palestinians with the First Intifada. Israel has hardly helped itself with its extreme counterattacks but it was the Muslims who "started" it. Hell, if they simply accepted the UNs decision, Palestinians would have their own state today. Instead in their hatred for Jews they revolted and tried to remove them permenantly. And now they have nothing. You simply cannot blame one party in this mess. It is an oversimplification to try and racist views simply come out of those who do try.

You mean the same people that allied themselves w/ Nazi Germany and supported the SS?

Thats what you stated. Clear implciation. And ignores the fact that Germany was given self government not long after ww2.


along with me and a few pals guarding them to be sure they acted nice.

You mean the same people that allied themselves w/ Nazi Germany and supported the SS?

Thats what you stated. Clear implciation. And ignores the fact that Germany was given self government not long after ww2.

But that doesn't say anywhere that I called them "bonafide Nazi's" Try again. Their leaders, who supported Germany, was the same leaders after the war. Germany was occupied and divided for years afterwards. You may remember that whole "east west" thing. As well as territorial losses.

Nope, that would be the Palestinians with the First Intifada. Israel has hardly helped itself with its extreme counterattacks but it was the Muslims who "started" it. Hell, if they simply accepted the UNs decision, Palestinians would have their own state today. Instead in their hatred for Jews they revolted and tried to remove them permenantly. And now they have nothing. You simply cannot blame one party in this mess. It is an oversimplification to try and racist views simply come out of those who do try.

^WHAT HE SAID!

but UB won't accept this as a fact. No the Jews are out there bombing and killing cuz they like it. It;s not that they went to the Middle East to find a safe haven where they wouldn't have to fight any more...oh nooooo.

Nope, that would be the Palestinians with the First Intifada. Israel has hardly helped itself with its extreme counterattacks but it was the Muslims who "started" it. Hell, if they simply accepted the UNs decision, Palestinians would have their own state today. Instead in their hatred for Jews they revolted and tried to remove them permenantly. And now they have nothing. You simply cannot blame one party in this mess. It is an oversimplification to try and racist views simply come out of those who do try.


The intifada was in the 1980's....I think you're referring to the first Arab Israeli war, which was the neighbouring states, rather than the locals. Not they disapproved either, but thats neither here nor there. The first Arab Israeli war was not a Palestinian revolt - they'd been disarmed as a result of the rebellion of 1936 and had little armaments or appetite for it.

1. Don't confuse Jews with Israelites or even Hebrews.

Umm son, they are literally one in the same in this case.

2. Arabs are descended also from Canaanites and everybody else who had ever lived there, including Hebrews.

Now back that up with some evidence. And another thing! Jews also descended from Arabs too. :rolleyes:

I know man. I have taken a reasonable tone with UB, but he seems stuck on "kill the Zionist hatemongering Fascist Jewbastards, so I decided to hold up the alternative. As I said earlier, this isn't a one sided issue. It's so comlex by now that it is barely describable. And yet, the Jews DO only seem to go nuts when the Pallys walk into a Bar Mitsfa and blof the vride out the window, along wit hteh rest of the weddding.

All I have been saying is if the Pallys would get over the whole Kill Jews thing "which doens't seem likely in a society where babies where bomber suits cause its cute) then the Jews would calm down, and the Pallys could calm down, and hopefully some talks could star again. Sadly every time the Jews try to take it down a notchthe Pallys crank it up two more. Which leads me to believe its not necessarily the Jews fault, even if they are baaaaad people who shold be exterminatged as UB seems to want.

Yes, it would be nice if UB would remember that the Israelis and Palestinians lived pretty well side by side for two decades with no issues. It was the Israelis building in the West Bank that began the start of the violence, as I see it anyway, but then the Pallestinians chose to react the way they did...

If both sides would back down I'm sure that peace could happen, the radicals simply need to be ignored. Getting another Oslo started shouldn't be that difficult as long as moderates don't let the crazies back them into a corner.

But that doesn't say anywhere that I called them "bonafide Nazi's" Try again. Their leaders, who supported Germany, was the same leaders after the war. Germany was occupied and divided for years afterwards. You may remember that whole "east west" thing. As well as territorial losses.

Clear implication. And I think be fucked out of what is now Israel was territorial loss enough, considering they didnt start the war in the first place.

He's obviously not, as his grasp of history has shown. I find it funny he's told me to go back to school for it (I'm working on my MA) when he was completely wrong (again).

He's been wrong throughout most of this thread. Does not matter what facts are used! His biasness and prejudices gets in the way of all logic.

No it's not. 1. Jews are not a race.

My roommate would disagree with you on that.

2. They are not to be removed because they are Jews but because they are (ideologically motivated) foreign invaders who don't belong there.

In that case, the arabs need to leave the area too as they invaded the land as well. Will you support that?

The intifada was in the 1980's....I think you're referring to the first Arab Israeli war, which was the neighbouring states, rather than the locals. Not they disapproved either, but thats neither here nor there. The first Arab Israeli war was not a Palestinian revolt - they'd been disarmed as a result of the rebellion of 1936 and had little armaments or appetite for it.

I was making a reference to the violence today. Before the First Intifada Palestinians and Israelis lived in relative peace, there were open borders between Israel and the West Bank! No checkpoints, military presence, etc. Going back to the Great Arab Revolt would be useful in explaining how Israel got a state but the violence today I believe has a more direct link to the Intifada of the late '80s. It turned Israel into a paranoid garrison state and started the circle of violence we see today.

No I haven't. And I didn't even know you're from the US. Pretty weak. But no wonder you hate Arabs and cannot understand why they feel abused by the West. Your country's invasion of Iraq demonstrates that very clearly.

When losing an argument, bring up Iraq. That part I'm going to ignore for it has no bearing on this thread.

To say someone hates arabs because they disagree with you is retarded.

Nope, that would be the Palestinians with the First Intifada. Israel has hardly helped itself with its extreme counterattacks but it was the Muslims who "started" it. Hell, if they simply accepted the UNs decision, Palestinians would have their own state today. Instead in their hatred for Jews they revolted and tried to remove them permenantly. And now they have nothing. You simply cannot blame one party in this mess. It is an oversimplification to try and racist views simply come out of those who do try.Intifada? You are so unbelievably ignorant.
And there was no reason for Arabs to accept the young UN's partition of Palestine. Why should the have? Would you give away half your home to foreign intruders? And you know, while Jews could have gone elsewhere (as they were offered several other places), the Palestinian Arabs couldn't. Arabs had their lives there and then. Foreign Jews didn't. And I don't see what justification would be valid for a change in the right of Arabs to live where they lived since ancient times. You can't just go somewhere and expect the inhabitants to make room for you and be friendly. It wasn't their hatred for Jews that sparked the Arabs' reaction but their dislike of foreign intruders, whose set goal it was to take their land to create a state..

The ethnic cleansing was and is still done by Israel, not Arabs. Palestinian Arabs are fighting to get back what's theirs. That's not ethnic cleansing.

No but blowing up shopping malls, nightclubs, restraunts, hotels, and school buses is nothing but terrorism which is illegal.

No but blowing up shopping malls, nightclubs, restraunts, hotels, and school buses is nothing but terrorism which is illegal.

Depends. What do you suggest they should do instead ?

and what the israeilis are doing is still not ethnic cleansing. they are not attemoting to eport the Pallys, simply trying to cordon them off so they don't blow more israelis up.

ethnic cleansing is where you deport everybody out of country or kill them simply to be rid of them. The jews are being brutish intheir attempts to defend themselves, but that still ain;t ethnic cleansing.

No but blowing up shopping malls, nightclubs, restraunts, hotels, and school buses is nothing but terrorism which is illegal.It's only a very desperate attempt to fight of the invaders. And legality is unfortunately no indication for justice.

and what the israeilis are doing is still not ethnic cleansing. they are not attemoting to eport the Pallys, simply trying to cordon them off so they don't blow more israelis up.

ethnic cleansing is where you deport everybody out of country or kill them simply to be rid of them. The jews are being brutish intheir attempts to defend themselves, but that still ain;t ethnic cleansing.So how were the Zionists planning to set up a state in Arab Palestine without removing the inhabitants? Without claiming their land, their lives, their heritage?

erm, by follwing the UN ruling maybe? by first buying land legally and then being attacked by the Pallys and then going to the UN for help? Atno time until well after they were attacked did they decide to partition the counrty, as has been stated. ergo, no intention of ethnic cleansing.

Intifada? You are so unbelievably ignorant.

You are hardly proving yourself knowledgable about the situation, so perhaps you should just sit down, ok?

And there was no reason for Arabs to accept the young UN's partition of Palestine. Why should the have? Would you give away half your home to foreign intruders? And you know, while Jews could have gone elsewhere (as they were offered several other places), the Palestinian Arabs couldn't. Arabs had their lives there and then. Foreign Jews didn't. And I don't see what justification would be valid for a change in the right of Arabs to live where they lived since ancient times. You can't just go somewhere and expect the inhabitants to make room for you and be friendly. It wasn't their hatred for Jews that sparked the Arabs' reaction but their dislike of foreign intruders, whose set goal it was to take their land to create a state..

Jewish people were legitamately migrating there for the decades leading up to the UN partition. Whether or not they should have been allowed in is debateable but once there they were a clear minority who had to be listened to. When the UN made a Jewish and Palestinians state that should have been acceptable, they would have been independent instead of being under a British mandate or an Ottomon possession. They had a good deal and nothing like it has come since. And there is no excuse for suicide bombers actions. It is not going to accomplish anything except to piss off the Israelis and make the situation worse. Then again maybe that is the entire point?....

i give up. this guys not going to accept that the PLO was a bad thing.

Intifada? You are so unbelievably ignorant.

HAHA! He calls those who know facts ignorant than rants with one-sided tails. This dude has got to be from the Middle East.

Depends. What do you suggest they should do instead ?

If they want to be legit, go after the government or the military. Oh wait, that would make to much sense.

erm, by follwing the UN ruling maybe? by first buying land legally and then being attacked by the Pallys and then going to the UN for help? Atno time until well after they were attacked did they decide to partition the counrty, as has been stated. ergo, no intention of ethnic cleansing.

"Pallys"?

Okay then, from here on in I want to see you refer to the Zionist cause as the "Izzys".

i give up. this guys not going to accept that the PLO was a bad thing.Efforts of liberation are never a bad thing.

It's only a very desperate attempt to fight of the invaders. And legality is unfortunately no indication for justice.

Sorry but you are wrong. If they want to do things legally, then they need to stop blowing up innocent men, women, and children and go after the IDF and/or the government itself. They are not doing so. By blowing up men, women, and children, it shows that you have no regard for life.

Are you kidding me? :upyours: The Nazis blamed every bad thing on the Jews and mass murdered 6 MILLION. Israelis are just fighting for the home that RIGHTEOUSLY belongs to them! The Nazis were just heartless murderers. 6 million Palestinians were NOT killed in the first place, but if they were, there would be more of a reason than just blame for the wrongs in the world. Now don't get me wrong, I'm not racist against Palestinians, but to compare Israel to their MURDERERS?

You have no heart.

If they want to be legit, go after the government or the military. Oh wait, that would make to much sense.The government and military are only doing the Israeli's will. If someone attacks you with a gun you will fight the attacker and not the gun. Their military is only a killing tool in the hands of the Israelis.

Efforts of liberation are never a bad thing.

Indeed but in this day in age, you cannot go around blowing up civilians and expect to get something.

If they want to be legit, go after the government or the military. Oh wait, that would make to much sense.

You seriously expect a bunch of loosely organised men with limited weaponry to go head to head with one of the most advanced militaries in the world ?

No but blowing up shopping malls, nightclubs, restraunts, hotels, and school buses is nothing but terrorism which is illegal.

the israelis are no better than the terrorists. i personally would prefere then to talk things out but the israelis give them little option.
if you're a dude from a wee little state and a bigger is attacking you. if you think you could be dead in a few days or your family have been murdered by them, you act irrationally. the thought goes through thier head, "why die by thier hands, if i can chose my own dead and take some of my enemies with me?"

Indeed but in this day in age, you cannot go around blowing up civilians and expect to get something.

oh so you are against the israeli, american and english government then?

You seriously expect a bunch of loosely organised men with limited weaponry to go head to head with one of the most advanced militaries in the world ?

Who says anything about fighting a conventional war? Instead of blowing up civilians they blow up military and government targets. Going after civilians will never get you what you want, only get you hated by the world.

oh so you are against the israeli, american and english government then?

So the Israelis, Americans and British intentially target civilians like the terrorists do? Target shopping malls, restaurants, busses in order to kill as many innocents as possible?

Who says anything about fighting a conventional war? Instead of blowing up civilians they blow up military and government targets. Going after civilians will never get you what you want, only get you hated by the world.Get hated by the world? The world already showed its hatred for them when they agreed to take their land and give it to foreign Jews.

So the Israelis, Americans and British intentially target civilians like the terrorists do? Target shopping malls, restaurants, busses in order to kill as many innocents as possible?Well, the news we have from Palestine and Iraq indicate that. And I am sure that what's not in the news is far worse. The world knows how Americans speak of Middle-Easterners.

Well, the news we have from Palestine and Iraq indicate that. And I am sure that what's not in the news is far worse. The world knows how Americans speak of Middle-Easterners.

The world should stop watching FOX News in that case. Clearly you didn't see the coverage of Israel going into Lebanon this summer. I've never seen so much Israel bashing. Hell, people doctored photos so they could bash the Israelis harder. And if you actually think that Americans are purposely killing civilians then you need a serious reality check.

The government and military are only doing the Israeli's will. If someone attacks you with a gun you will fight the attacker and not the gun. Their military is only a killing tool in the hands of the Israelis.

And the suicide bombers are the killing tools Hamas and Al Aqsa Martyers Brigade.

Here's a tip though. Israel spends most of its time REACTING to a terror attack. They do things defensively meaning they don't do a thing unless provoked. That is something that I know you can't understand because you have rose colored glasses on.

You seriously expect a bunch of loosely organised men with limited weaponry to go head to head with one of the most advanced militaries in the world ?

Hamas and Al Aqsa Martyers brigade are not loosely organized. They are well organized.

oh so you are against the israeli, american and english government then?

Big difference between intentionally targeting civilians (IE Hamas, Al Aqsa Maryters Brigade, Al Qaeda) and bombing targets near a residential zone. Bombs and missiles do go astray and any civilian deaths is a tragedy but unavoidable in war.

However, intentionally targeting civilians as the terrorists do is reprehensible and they deserve nothing.

The world should stop watching FOX News in that case. Clearly you didn't see the coverage of Israel going into Lebanon this summer. I've never seen so much Israel bashing. Hell, people doctored photos so they could bash the Israelis harder. And if you actually think that Americans are purposely killing civilians then you need a serious reality check.

He already does need a serious reality check and the world needs to stop watching Cable News in general and not just Fox News.

Well, the news we have from Palestine and Iraq indicate that. And I am sure that what's not in the news is far worse. The world knows how Americans speak of Middle-Easterners.

As if Middle-Easterners don't speak even worse of Americans. It's worth noting that Americans didn't really talk of Middle-Easterners at all, one way or the other, until many of the latter started spewing language of hate and death toward the former.

Big difference between intentionally targeting civilians (IE Hamas, Al Aqsa Maryters Brigade, Al Qaeda) and bombing targets near a residential zone. Bombs and missiles do go astray and any civilian deaths is a tragedy but unavoidable in war.

However, intentionally targeting civilians as the terrorists do is reprehensible and they deserve nothing.

i dont see how people like you are so blind. if you fire a missile into a residential area, not near, your are bound to cilivilians. its a pansey way of fighting. everytime i read about israels "reactions" there are more civilians dead than thier "targets".

Indeed but in this day in age, you cannot go around blowing up civilians and expect to get something.

Ahhhh, if only you'd been in the Whitehouse....

erm, by follwing the UN ruling maybe? by first buying land legally and then being attacked by the Pallys and then going to the UN for help? Atno time until well after they were attacked did they decide to partition the counrty, as has been stated. ergo, no intention of ethnic cleansing.

7% of what was the mandate.....

And the suicide bombers are the killing tools Hamas and Al Aqsa Martyers Brigade.

Here's a tip though. Israel spends most of its time REACTING to a terror attack. They do things defensively meaning they don't do a thing unless provoked. That is something that I know you can't understand because you have rose colored glasses on.What are you talking about? Palestinians only REACT to the invasion of foreign Jews who constantly provoke Arabs.

i dont see how people like you are so blind. if you fire a missile into a residential area, not near, your are bound to cilivilians. its a pansey way of fighting. everytime i read about israels "reactions" there are more civilians dead than thier "targets".

Look. It's sad, but you have to cut losses and defend yourself and your own. It's either fire the missile, or don't do so, and let your target go to come back and kill more of your own people again another time. Which would you do, smart one?

As if Middle-Easterners don't speak even worse of Americans. It's worth noting that Americans didn't really talk of Middle-Easterners at all, one way or the other, until many of the latter started spewing language of hate and death toward the former.The latter started spewing language of hate and death toward the former as soon as the former started meddling in the affairs of those states. For oil.

i dont see how people like you are so blind.

I just live in reality. If that is being blind then you are an idiot. I am not blind at all but know the reality of the situation. The only people blind here are those who are calling for the dismantling of the Jewish state and saying that the arabs were there first when in fact, they were not.

if you fire a missile into a residential area, not near, your are bound to cilivilians. its a pansey way of fighting. everytime i read about israels "reactions" there are more civilians dead than thier "targets".

Here's a hint. Terrorists hide among civilians. They do not live in an area where there is a sign saying "Terrorists live here". They hide among civilians so that the IDF does not attack. Guess what? They attack anyway. Do the IDF regret civlian casualties outside of their target? Oh most definitely.

He already does need a serious reality check and the world needs to stop watching Cable News in general and not just Fox News.

I find it hard to get solid informative news anywhere, nevermind just cable. Age of the soundbite. Be nice if news would stop those flashy graphics as well. News can't be that boring that it needs to be spiced up, right?

Look. It's sad, but you have to cut losses and defend yourself and your own. It's either fire the missile, or don't do so, and let your target go to come back and kill more of your own people again another time. Which would you do, smart one?

Are you now talking about the Palestinians or the Israelis ? Because the question is equally valid for both sides.

Look. It's sad, but you have to cut losses and defend yourself and your own. It's either fire the missile, or don't do so, and let your target go to come back and kill more of your own people again another time. Which would you do, smart one?Yeah, losses that aren't your own are easily justified. Put the question is who is the aggressor and who is the defender. The aggressor is the Jewish state, and Arabs try to defend or rather to regain what they have lost due to foreign powers' policies.

What are you talking about? Palestinians only REACT to the invasion of foreign Jews who constantly provoke Arabs.

Whose reacting to what? I already told you that the Jews were there before the arabs were. You have failed to recognize that fact.

I find it hard to get solid informative news anywhere, nevermind just cable. Age of the soundbite. Be nice if news would stop those flashy graphics as well. News can't be that boring that it needs to be spiced up, right?

I agree with you 100%.

Again, somebody brings up the hoary old straw man argument of oil.

Even so, does "meddling" deserve hate speech and suicide attacks? 's a bit on the "overkill" side, pun intended.

Yeah, losses that aren't your own are easily justified. Put the question is who is the aggressor and who is the defender. The aggressor is the Jewish state, and Arabs try to defend or rather to regain what they have lost due to foreign powers' policies.

And if you look at the flip side of the equation (something that you have no concept of apparently), the jews are defending themselves from the Arab aggressors.

Yeah, losses that aren't your own are easily justified. Put the question is who is the aggressor and who is the defender. The aggressor is the Jewish state, and Arabs try to defend or rather to regain what they have lost due to foreign powers' policies.

This issue of who's aggressor and who's defender is a complete stalemate. Both sides scream it all day.

Look. It's sad, but you have to cut losses and defend yourself and your own. It's either fire the missile, or don't do so, and let your target go to come back and kill more of your own people again another time. Which would you do, smart one?

glad you asked.

as a phrase in my country, "a talk out is better than a walk out".

using an example of a simular situation last centuary. i will use alternate names to describe situation.
group A invades and opresses group B. group B (after awhile) uses guerilla warfare (sp?) and uncoventional methods to fight back. eventually group B is somewhat successful and they start having negotiations with group A. group B agrees with terms
and the oppressors leave most of the country. however, apart of group B are unhappy, this group C.
<cuts large piece of history>
group C become terrorists.
eventually group A have peace talks with group C. group C signs a ceasefire, 10 years later group C gets rid of weapons. group C are now negotiating a powershare.
end result. less death, more peace.

And if you look at the flip side of the equation (something that you have no concept of apparently), the jews are defending themselves from the Arab aggressors.How can those who suffer a foreign invasion be the aggressors? That's completely illogic.

This issue of who's aggressor and who's defender is a complete stalemate. Both sides scream it all day.But since it's not the Arabs who came to take the land of others, it's pretty obvious that the Israeli side is lying when it claims to be 'defending' anything.

How can those who suffer a foreign invasion be the aggressors? That's completely illogic.

Agreed. Glad we can agree on this statement though I am not agreeing to what you think I may be agreeing too.

But since it's not the Arabs who the land of others, it's pretty obvious that the Israeli side is lying.

:headbang:

BOTH SIDES LIE!

glad you asked.

as a phrase in my country, "a talk out is better than a walk out".

using an example of a simular situation last centuary. i will use alternate names to describe situation.
group A invades and opresses group B. group B (after awhile) uses guerilla warfare (sp?) and uncoventional methods to fight back. eventually group B is somewhat successful and they start having negotiations with group A. group B agrees with terms
and the oppressors leave most of the country. however, apart of group B are unhappy, this group C.
<cuts large piece of history>
group C become terrorists.
eventually group A have peace talks with group C. group C signs a ceasefire, 10 years later group C gets rid of weapons. group C are now negotiating a powershare.
end result. less death, more peace.

And how do you propose, differently than has been proposed yet before (read, successfuly) to implement/instigate the beginnings of such an ideal process?

And if you look at the flip side of the equation (something that you have no concept of apparently), the jews are defending themselves from the Arab aggressors.

Apparently the Arabs can do no wrong when it comes to attacking Jews. Must be nice to live in such a black and white world. Must make things easy for some people.

And how do you propose, differently than has been proposed yet before (read, successfuly) to implement/instigate the beginnings of such an ideal process?

Without pointing any fingers, of course. In doing so, any plan proposed will be illegitimized, as the negotiation table needs to be clear on both sides for both to agree to sit down.

Agreed. Glad we can agree on this statement though I am not agreeing to what you think I may be agreeing too.European Jews are the invaders. They are the aggressors. The Arabs are those who defend themselves. You won't change the facts with whatever you say.

Apparently the Arabs can do no wrong when it comes to attacking Jews. Must be nice to live in such a black and white world. Must make things easy for some people.

It must make things easier. The world is not black and white as UB is trying to make it out to be.

Apparently the Arabs can do no wrong when it comes to attacking Jews. Must be nice to live in such a black and white world. Must make things easy for some people.Arabs can do no wrong when it comes to attacking foreign intruders. That those were and are Jews is not the relevant point. If Arabs really had had anything against Jews there wouldn't have been any in the last centuries.

European Jews are the invaders. They are the aggressors. The Arabs are those who defend themselves. You won't change the facts with whatever you say.

And what about the jews there who are defending themselves from the Arabs who have attacked the state that they live in? They most assuredly see the Arabs who have been attacking them as invaders and thus defend themselves accordingly.

You cannot change the facts with whatever you say. The facts are not fully on your side.

European Jews are the invaders. They are the aggressors. The Arabs are those who defend themselves. You won't change the facts with whatever you say.

And no matter what you say it doesn't excuse the actions of radical Palestinians. They are not going to get my sympathy as long as they kill civilians. Far as I'm concerned with the Israeli/Palestinians matter, until one side cleans up its act, a pox on both their houses.

And how do you propose, differently than has been proposed yet before (read, successfuly) to implement/instigate the beginnings of such an ideal process?

unfortunatly the majority of palestinians want to have peace talk, but thier are these annoying terrorists messing things up. by the time it takes to try talk to these people to get them to talk israel would have already murdered more civilians thus creating more terrorists. israel should stop completely what they are doing and for once take the defensive side. then try to negotiate with the terrorists. its a long process. but in the long run, thier will be less death. the situation i described there took 80 years and still isnt resolved, but in the process.

European Jews are the invaders. They are the aggressors. The Arabs are those who defend themselves. You won't change the facts with whatever you say.

Look. You too can spout this as many times as you like, but it's no more legitimate than any other claim. If you take it far back, recall that the ethnic forefathers of modern Jews, the Hebrews, were there FIRST. So the Jews today have at least SOME claim to a homeland there; at least some piece for themselves.

Far as I'm concerned with the Israeli/Palestinians matter, until one side cleans up its act, a pox on both their houses.

You know, as much as I support Israel, I have to agree with this statement.

And no matter what you say it doesn't excuse the actions of radical Palestinians. They are not going to get my sympathy as long as they kill civilians. Far as I'm concerned with the Israeli/Palestinians matter, until one side cleans up its act, a pox on both their houses.Palestinians don't want your sympathy, they want their homeland back.

Palestinians don't want your sympathy, they want their homeland back.

It isn't even their homeland.

unfortunatly the majority of palestinians want to have peace talk, but thier are these annoying terrorists messing things up. by the time it takes to try talk to these people to get them to talk israel would have already murdered more civilians thus creating more terrorists. israel should stop completely what they are doing and for once take the defensive side. then try to negotiate with the terrorists. its a long process. but in the long run, thier will be less death. the situation i described there took 80 years and still isnt resolved, but in the process.

You're pretty correct on the way things go down. It's an unfortunate and wicked circle. It's a little hasty to tell Israel to stop completely and "take the defensive side," as she'll immediately tell you that's already the case. What needs to happen, any of us can tell, is a total and simultaneous cease-fire on both sides. Of course this is obvious, and we all know has been tried before. Unfortunately, we also know it's yet to work out. And it is sad.

Palestinians don't want your sympathy, they want their homeland back.

Sure they do. They want us to cry about their situation. They want us to hate the Israelis like they do. They would like to steal the land away from Israel sure, but they aren't going to do it alone. Unless they get international support it will never happen. And they will never get international support to get their "homeland" when they kill civilians.

Look. You too can spout this as many times as you like, but it's no more legitimate than any other claim. If you take it far back, recall that the ethnic forefathers of modern Jews, the Hebrews, were there FIRST. So the Jews today have at least SOME claim to a homeland there; at least some piece for themselves.

sweet i want germany back. or bettert yet. all those from europe, americas and other parts of asia, should all go to back india and take thier land. my people havent been in india for 12000years, i want my land mack. all of it. sweet no i'm the king of india.

You're pretty correct on the way things go down. It's an unfortunate and wicked circle. It's a little hasty to tell Israel to stop completely and "take the defensive side," as she'll immediately tell you that's already the case. What needs to happen, any of us can tell, is a total and simultaneous cease-fire on both sides. Of course this is obvious, and we all know has been tried before. Unfortunately, we also know it's yet to work out. And it is sad.

what i ment by take the defensive is, when trying to take out 'terrorist targets', use snipers. far less likely to murder a bunch of kids. they should only protect thier borders and not go byond that.

Look. You too can spout this as many times as you like, but it's no more legitimate than any other claim. If you take it far back, recall that the ethnic forefathers of modern Jews, the Hebrews, were there FIRST. So the Jews today have at least SOME claim to a homeland there; at least some piece for themselves.1. That's just not true. Arabs descend from exactly the same folks.
2. Those who lived in the land after the end of the Ottoman Empire were entitled to live their lives there in peace and undisturbed by outsiders. That's all that counts. Jews had had their lives in Europe and elsewhere for centuries. There never was any reason to let these foreign Jews into Palestine to create a state. The very idea of this implicated the removal of those who already lived there. Why is this so hard to understand?
Israelis (with Western help) have always altered the situation to the disadvantage of Palestinian Arabs and then tried to get into "negotiation" as if the situation had never been different. But Arabs can't just forget what they have lost. And they have every right to fight to regain that.

Alright, Gorias. Look. If nothing else, Arabs have places to call home; to call their own. PLENTY of them. Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Oman, etc. Without Israel, is there any other place Jews could call their own? Or would you rather expect them to be a homeless, itinerant ethnicity floating around in other countries forever? IF NOTHING ELSE, one needs to be fair and throw them a bone.

Sure they do. They want us to cry about their situation. They want us to hate the Israelis like they do. They would like to steal the land away from Israel sure, but they aren't going to do it alone. Unless they get international support it will never happen. And they will never get international support to get their "homeland" when they kill civilians.Palestinians have always been on their own anyways. They don't forget that it was the "international support" that cost them their homeland in the first place. Israel and the West have accomplished what the Turks and Crusaders could not.

Alright, Gorias. Look. If nothing else, Arabs have places to call home; to call their own. PLENTY of them. Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Oman, etc. Without Israel, is there any other place Jews could call their own? Or would you rather expect them to be a homeless, itinerant ethnicity floating around in other countries forever? IF NOTHING ELSE, one needs to be fair and throw them a bone.

your new here so i'm not going to flame you.
russia made a state for the jews. they rejected it. america is now thier homeland. other little shitty religions dont get a homeland, why should they?

1. That's just not true. Arabs descend from exactly the same folks.
2. Those who lived in the land after the end of the Ottoman Empire were entitled to live their lives there in peace and undisturbed by outsiders. That's all that counts. Jews had had their lives in Europe and elsewhere for centuries. There never was any reason to let these foreign Jews into Palestine to create a state. The very idea of this implicated the removal of those who already lived there. Why is this so hard to understand?
Israelis (with Western help) have always altered the situation to the disadvantage of Palestinian Arabs and then tried to get into "negotiation" as if the situation had never been different. But Arabs can't just forget what they have lost. And they have every right to fight to regain that.

I'll refer to your 1st point. Indeed, that's quite true. Therefore, at best they both have an equal claim to the land Israel now sits on. This still illegitimizes labeling Jews as usurpers and invaders. The playing field is leveled. So, what do we do now?

your new here so i'm not going to flame you.
russia made a state for the jews. they rejected it. america is now thier homeland. other little shitty religions dont get a homeland, why should they?

Huh. Islam seem to have plenty.

Alright, Gorias. Look. If nothing else, Arabs have places to call home; to call their own. PLENTY of them. Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Yemen, Oman, etc. Without Israel, is there any other place Jews could call their own? Or would you rather expect them to be a homeless, itinerant ethnicity floating around in other countries forever? IF NOTHING ELSE, one needs to be fair and throw them a bone.Jews had their homes in where-ever they lived, they weren't "homeless". They weren't nomades.
And asking any individual Arab to leave his home because you with your ignorant attitude only see Arabs collectively is unacceptable.

Besides, I thought the Israel/Palestine argument was more of an ethnic one, at least in the fashion we've discussed it here thus far. Why broaden it now by bringing up religion? This is tangled enough already.

I'll refer to your 1st point. Indeed, that's quite true. Therefore, at best they both have an equal claim to the land Israel now sits on. This still illegitimizes labeling Jews as usurpers and invaders. The playing field is leveled. So, what do we do now?The point is that while Jews could have gone elsewhere to make their state the Palestinian Arabs couldn't. And the simple fact that Jews weren't there (except for a small minority) makes them invaders and their claim to create a state in the very homes and fields of the present inhabitants makes them usurpers.

Jews had their homes in where-ever they lived, they weren't "homeless". They weren't nomades.
And asking any individual Arab to leave his home because you with your ignorant attitude only see Arabs collectively is unacceptable.

This is a joke right? Or you are purposefully ignoring the discrimination and pogroms that Jews had to deal with. Not a very friendly home they had I'd say.

Huh. Islam seem to have plenty.

your religion doesnt intitle to live somewhere or not. being there first hand does. european jews moved people out of the way to live there, thus thet stole it. they have so claim, the bible is hardly a contract signed by 'god'. israel is the christian anyway.

Jews had their homes in where-ever they lived, they weren't "homeless". They weren't nomades.
And asking any individual Arab to leave his home because you with your ignorant attitude only see Arabs collectively is unacceptable.

Come now! The only reason I did so was to use the same label you had two posts earlier, regarding how Arabs and Hebrews descended from the same people. All I did was use your word. Don't jump on me for that and start pulling out derogatory adjectives like "ignorant."

This is a joke right? Or you are purposefully ignoring the discrimination and pogroms that Jews had to deal with. Not a very friendly home they had I'd say.

holocaust didnt reach everywhere.

This is a joke right? Or you are purposefully ignoring the discrimination and pogroms that Jews had to deal with. Not a very friendly home they had I'd say.And why would that justify punishing Arabs for that? Is it their fault that Jews didn't get along?

your religion doesnt intitle to live somewhere or not. being there first hand does. european jews moved people out of the way to live there, thus thet stole it. they have so claim, the bible is hardly a contract signed by 'god'. israel is the christian anyway.

And I didn't even make that claim. I'm trying to keep it ethnic! You're the one who brought religion up! Remember "shitty little religions?"

The British had control of the ottoman lands after WWI, that whole "to the victor, the spoils" thing. The Arabs should have been given their own land and their own state, but sadly they weren't. I am not against the fundemental idea of Israel, I am against how that idea was implemented.

There is a Palestinian homeland that was created. If you want to see what Palestine was, this is it.

http://www.dartmouth.edu/~gov46/pal-mandate-sremo-1922.gif

Of course the Arabs refuse to acknowledge that Jordan is the true Palestinian homeland because it doesn't give their argument much support.

And why would that justify punishing Arabs for that? Is it their fault that Jews didn't get along?

Its the Jews fault that they were persecuted? I suppose the Holocaust was the Jews fault also?

holocaust didnt reach everywhere.

The Holocuast is hardly the only example of Jewish persecution. Just the most infamous and the most horrific example you can give.

Anyway, it's lunchtime for me. You folks all have a good day.

Come now! The only reason I did so was to use the same label you had two posts earlier, regarding how Arabs and Hebrews descended from the same people. All I did was use your word. Don't jump on me for that and start pulling out derogatory adjectives like "ignorant."It is you who claims that they had equal right although Arabs actually lived in the land for centuries while Jews just lusted for it (out of many reasons, but predominantly ideological ones).

Come now! The only reason I did so was to use the same label you had two posts earlier, regarding how Arabs and Hebrews descended from the same people. All I did was use your word. Don't jump on me for that and start pulling out derogatory adjectives like "ignorant."

i'm legally allowed move to any eu country and tanzania. i am not however, allowed to go to those countries, kick out someone out of there house and i say "but i'm irish".

Its the Jews fault that they were persecuted? I suppose the Holocaust was the Jews fault also?I don't know. Definitely it's not the Arabs fault. That is all that is of relevance to the question why Arabs should cede land to foreigners.

The evil was in the Jews coming to Palestine from Europe and elsewhere to create a Jewish state in a land they didn't belong in.
The Jewish land ownership wasn't that large anyways.

Yeah it's really evil to try to escape the horrors of the Pogroms and Hitler's Germany.

Go play in traffic.

Its the Jews fault that they were persecuted? I suppose the Holocaust was the Jews fault also?

i blame most things on the socialists or alan.

Yeah it's really evil to try to escape the horrors of the Pogroms and Hitler's Germany.They could have escaped to somewhere else. They were offered other places, but they rejected for ideology.
And Zionism and unfounded Jewish claim of Arab land predates Hitler's Germany.

They could have escaped to somewhere else.

Where? America, Brittain, and every other country turned the ships with escapees around. Go get a fucking clue.

They could have escaped to somewhere else.

shush UB! thats a fact people like to ignor. you might start sounding like our side is right.

I don't know.

Well, that's all I need to know. You "don't know" whether the Jews were at fault for being persecuted. That tells me something right there.

Well, that's all I need to know. You "don't know" whether the Jews were at fault for being persecuted. That tells me something right there.

the main guy is in fault, is dead. other main contenders were out to death or in jail. a russia jail.
some got away with it, but not alot. germany certainly didnt.

Where? America, Brittain, and every other country turned the ships with escapees around. Go get a fucking clue.

you're a jew and you're in america. so silence.

Where? America, Brittain, and every other country turned the ships with escapees around. Go get a fucking clue.That was still not the Arabs' responsibility.

Well, that's all I need to know. You "don't know" whether the Jews were at fault for being persecuted. That tells me something right there.I don't know and I don't care. Arabs were not responsible for the plight of Jews in Europe, so there's no reason why they alone should pay for it.

I don't know and I don't care. Arabs were not responsible for the plight of Jews in Europe, so there's no reason why they alone should pay for it.

thats really it, isnt it?
why is it the arabs fault?

the main guy is in fault, is dead. other main contenders were out to death or in jail. a russia jail.
some got away with it, but not alot. germany certainly didnt.

Like I said the holocaust is not the only example of Jewish persecution. All of Eastern Europe was a hotbed of anti-Semitism. The Russian pogroms must have been especially fun for Jews. The fact is that they were not welcome in the countires they were in, never were.

I don't know and I don't care. Arabs were not responsible for the plight of Jews in Europe, so there's no reason why they alone should pay for it.

The Palestinians are only paying for it because they got violent in '48. And they are only ones effected by this, it is not as if the Arab world is touched in the slightest.

The Palestinians are only paying for it because they got violent in '48. And they are only ones effected by this, it is not as if the Arab world is touched in the slightest.Oh fuck you! This thing didn't start in '48. Jews started coming to Palestine for their racist ideology of Zionism and their lust for a state already 50 years prior to 48. Herzl published "Der Judenstaat" in 1896.

your new here so i'm not going to flame you.
russia made a state for the jews.

Proof of this please?

Like I said the holocaust is not the only example of Jewish persecution. All of Eastern Europe was a hotbed of anti-Semitism. The Russian pogroms must have been especially fun for Jews. The fact is that they were not welcome in the countires they were in, never were.1. That's not the Arabs fault.
2. If one particular group is not welcome where-ever it goes, maybe there's something wrong with this group.

holocaust didnt reach everywhere.

He was not talking about the Holocaust though that was just as bad. I guess you do not know about the pogroms in the *ahem* Russia?

It is you who claims that they had equal right although Arabs actually lived in the land for centuries while Jews just lusted for it (out of many reasons, but predominantly ideological ones).

Retarded argument for it ignores the fact that the Jews have lived there for centuries as well.

Oh fuck you! This thing didn't start in '48. Jews started coming to Palestine for their racist ideology of Zionism and their lust for a state already 50 years prior to 48.

Hit a nerve did I? Sure the Jews wanted a homeland of their own. And they acheived that and the Palestinians would have gotten an independent state as well. But they said screw it lets go for all of it through violence. Didn't work out so well for them. And I don't need that anti-Semetic talk about Zionism being racist. It is not racist to desire a place to live where they don't have to put up with the kind of shit you obviously would love to dish out. If Europeans left them alone this situation would not be happening. If the Palestinians accepted the UNs decision they would have a land of their own and this situation would not be happening.

you're a jew and you're in america. so silence.

You cannot tell someone to shut up for disagreeing with you.

Like I said the holocaust is not the only example of Jewish persecution. All of Eastern Europe was a hotbed of anti-Semitism. The Russian pogroms must have been especially fun for Jews. The fact is that they were not welcome in the countires they were in, never were.

Shh! UB and Glorias do not like facts to get in the way of their rose colored world.

Shh! UB and Glorias do not like facts to get in the way of their rose colored world.

I have to try to penetrate the fog. Especially if they actually believe that except for the Holocaust the history of the Jews has been a happy one.

Proof of this please?

you can check wikipedia i'm sure they can back me up on this. i dont get all my info from the internet. but i'll come back with the name of the area. i thinkits called the "jewish republic of (blank)".

you can check wikipedia i'm sure they can back me up on this. i dont get all my info from the internet. but i'll come back with the name of the area. i thinkits called the "jewish republic of (blank)".

You have to show proof of it and wikipedia does not necessarily mean its 100% factual.

Hit a nerve did I? Sure the Jews wanted a homeland of their own. And they acheived that and the Palestinians would have gotten an independent state as well. But they said screw it lets go for all of it through violence. Didn't work out so well for them. And I don't need that anti-Semetic talk about Zionism being racist. It is not racist to desire a place to live where they don't have to put up with the kind of shit you obviously would love to dish out. If Europeans left them alone this situation would not be happening. If the Palestinians accepted the UNs decision they would have a land of their own and this situation would not be happening.You're just repeating the same old BS again. Zionism is a form of racism. There's even a UN resolution stating so. And the desire for a Jewish state in a foreign land that in its creation would require the already present population to just disappear because they are not Jewish, is clearly racist. And as I said many times before, they could have desired their damn state elsewhere. Some place where they'd have no-one to remove first. There was no reason for the Palestinians to accept the UN partition plan. Why would they have? And they weren't even asked what they wanted.
If you like the Jews so much, why don't you let them into your home?

I have to try to penetrate the fog. Especially if they actually believe that except for the Holocaust the history of the Jews has been a happy one.

again as you have not answered UB's question. why the arabs fault? note the problem started prior to the 20th centuary.

I have to try to penetrate the fog. Especially if they actually believe that except for the Holocaust the history of the Jews has been a happy one.The history of the Jews is not at all an issue in the demand that Palestinian Arabs should give away their homeland to foreigners. There is just no connexion.

again as you have not answered UB's question. why the arabs fault? note the problem started prior to the 20th centuary.

It is not the Palestinians land. Simple as that. And it became the Palestinians problem when they decided to turn violent instead of finally accepting a country for themselves.

You're just repeating the same old BS again. Zionism is a form of racism. There's even a UN resolution stating so. And the desire for a Jewish state in a foreign land that in its creation would require the already present population to just disappear because they are not Jewish, is clearly racist. And as I said many times before, they could have desired their damn state elsewhere. Some place where they'd have no-one to remove first. There was no reason for the Palestinians to accept the UN partition plan. Why would they have? And they weren't even asked what they wanted.
If you like the Jews so much, why don't you let them into your home?

The UN doesn't know what it is talking about. Zionism was simply the desire to get their own homeland, nothing racist about it. Funny for the UN to talk about that when they formed Israel to begin with. Nothing contradictory at all, no sir. The UN formed Israel where it was, can't blame the Jews for that. You can go walk into a shop in Tel Aviv and blow yourself up, strike a blow for the Arab cause. Then at least I won't have to listen to your racist bullshit.

You have to show proof of it and wikipedia does not necessarily mean its 100% factual.

its on the map i have at home. google maps should have it.

i doubt wikipedia makes up areas that are also on maps. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast#Jews_in_the_region)

heres a snipet.

The Jewish administrative division was founded with the help of Komzet in 1928 as the Jewish National District. It was the result of Stalin's nationality policy, by which each of the national groups that formed the Soviet Union would receive a territory in which to pursue cultural autonomy in a socialist framework. In that sense, it was also a response to two supposed threats to the Soviet state: Judaism, which ran counter to official state policy of atheism; and Zionism, and the creation of the modern State of Israel, which countered Soviet views of nationalism. The idea was to create a new "Soviet Zion", where a proletarian Jewish culture could be developed. Yiddish, rather than Hebrew, would be the national language, and a new socialist literature and arts would replace religion as the primary expression of culture.

its on the map i have at home. google maps should have it.

i doubt wikipedia makes up areas that are also on maps. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast#Jews_in_the_region)

heres a snipet.

The Jewish administrative division was founded with the help of Komzet in 1928 as the Jewish National District. It was the result of Stalin's nationality policy, by which each of the national groups that formed the Soviet Union would receive a territory in which to pursue cultural autonomy in a socialist framework. In that sense, it was also a response to two supposed threats to the Soviet state: Judaism, which ran counter to official state policy of atheism; and Zionism, and the creation of the modern State of Israel, which countered Soviet views of nationalism. The idea was to create a new "Soviet Zion", where a proletarian Jewish culture could be developed. Yiddish, rather than Hebrew, would be the national language, and a new socialist literature and arts would replace religion as the primary expression of culture.


So stick them out in the middle of nowhere with some of the worst climate available to avoid "antagonising non-Jews in those regions" where they were already established.

Good plan.

So stick them out in the middle of nowhere with some of the worst climate available to avoid "antagonising non-Jews in those regions" where they were already established.

Good plan.Now what? The Jews did not just desire a state? They did not just want to escape persecution? They just wanted Palestine?
So there is in fact even less reason for Palestinians to share their already tiny land with foreigners.
Admit it, you only want to see Arabs under oppression, that's all.

again as you have not answered UB's question. why the arabs fault? note the problem started prior to the 20th centuary.

It has been answered. The whole thing about the Palestinians in the area supporting Germany and opposing the UK during the war.

So stick them out in the middle of nowhere with some of the worst climate available to avoid "antagonising non-Jews in those regions" where they were already established.

Good plan.Now what? The Jews did not just desire a state? They did not just want to escape persecution? They just wanted Palestine?

You're just repeating the same old BS again. Zionism is a form of racism. There's even a UN resolution stating so. And the desire for a Jewish state in a foreign land that in its creation would require the already present population to just disappear because they are not Jewish, is clearly racist. And as I said many times before, they could have desired their damn state elsewhere. Some place where they'd have no-one to remove first. There was no reason for the Palestinians to accept the UN partition plan. Why would they have? And they weren't even asked what they wanted.
If you like the Jews so much, why don't you let them into your home?

Apparently, you lack a generel understanding of the history. The Jewish state is not in foreign land, it's in their homeland. The Hebrews/Jews were kicked out of Israel in something B.C by the Romans. This is called Diaspora. When the Hebrews/Jews started to return to their homeland/holyland after WWII, the Muslims formed terror groups to kill and terrorize the Jews so they wouldn't move back to their homeland. This is why the U.N partitioned the land, so each religion can have their own piece of land in the area. Muslim countries didn't want to abide by the partition plan, and started war. The Muslims lost, the Jews won, they (Muslims) started a war and lost, therefore it is the fault of no one else but their own that Israel exists.

If you want to go further back in history, Israel was a Jewish land even before it was a Muslim land because Judiasm is older than Islam. The real immigrants of the lands are the Muslims. When Islam was first born, the Arabs (from Arabic countries) moved to Palestine because important religious leaders from Islam lived there. The Palestinians/Muslims are the ones who truly don't belong there. In conclusion, Israel is a Jewish/Hebrew land, not an Arab/Muslim land.

Of course it's the Palestinians' land. They have lived in it since ancient times. History doesn't start with Israel.
But I suppose you are unable to think outside your stereotypical view that Jews can only be victims and never wrong-doers. Devout Christian, huh?

"Since ancient times". More selective dating methods and history again.

Of course you also ignore the posts where AC2 doesn't support Isreali actions universally. Typical.

You're just repeating the same old BS again. Zionism is a form of racism. There's even a UN resolution stating so. And the desire for a Jewish state in a foreign land that in its creation would require the already present population to just disappear because they are not Jewish, is clearly racist. And as I said many times before, they could have desired their damn state elsewhere. Some place where they'd have no-one to remove first. There was no reason for the Palestinians to accept the UN partition plan. Why would they have? And they weren't even asked what they wanted.
If you like the Jews so much, why don't you let them into your home?

Apparently, you lack a generel understanding of the history. The Jewish state is not in foreign land, it's in their homeland. The Hebrews/Jews were kicked out of Israel in something B.C by the Romans. This is called Diaspora. When the Hebrews/Jews started to return to their homeland/holyland after WWII, the Muslims formed terror groups to kill and terrorize the Jews so they wouldn't move back to their homeland. This is why the U.N partitioned the land, so each religion can have their own piece of land in the area. Muslim countries didn't want to abide by the partition plan, and started war. The Muslims lost, the Jews won, they (Muslims) started a war and lost, therefore it is the fault of no one else but their own that Israel exists.

If you want to go further back in history, Israel was a Jewish land even before it was a Muslim land because Judiasm is older than Islam. The real immigrants of the lands are the Muslims. When Islam was first born, the Arabs (from Arabic countries) moved to Palestine because important religious leaders from Islam lived there. The Palestinians/Muslims are the ones who truly don't belong there. In conclusion, Israel is a Jewish/Hebrew land, not an Arab/Muslim land.

You're just repeating the same old BS again. Zionism is a form of racism. There's even a UN resolution stating so. And the desire for a Jewish state in a foreign land that in its creation would require the already present population to just disappear because they are not Jewish, is clearly racist. And as I said many times before, they could have desired their damn state elsewhere. Some place where they'd have no-one to remove first. There was no reason for the Palestinians to accept the UN partition plan. Why would they have? And they weren't even asked what they wanted.
If you like the Jews so much, why don't you let them into your home?

Apparently, you lack a generel understanding of the history. The Jewish state is not in foreign land, it's in their homeland. The Hebrews/Jews were kicked out of Israel in something B.C by the Romans. This is called Diaspora. When the Hebrews/Jews started to return to their homeland/holyland after WWII, the Muslims formed terror groups to kill and terrorize the Jews so they wouldn't move back to their homeland. This is why the U.N partitioned the land, so each religion can have their own piece of land in the area. Muslim countries didn't want to abide by the partition plan, and started war. The Muslims lost, the Jews won, they (Muslims) started a war and lost, therefore it is the fault of no one else but their own that Israel exists.

If you want to go further back in history, Israel was a Jewish land even before it was a Muslim land because Judiasm is older than Islam. The real immigrants of the lands are the Muslims. When Islam was first born, the Arabs (from Arabic countries) moved to Palestine because important religious leaders from Islam lived there. The Palestinians/Muslims are the ones who truly don't belong there. In conclusion, Israel is a Jewish/Hebrew land, not an Arab/Muslim land.

Now to answer the original question, "Nazis or Israeli; Who's worse?" Hamas, Hezbollah and the Nazis are the worst.

It has been answered. The whole thing about the Palestinians in the area supporting Germany and opposing the UK during the war.?? in WW1 or what?

It has been answered. The whole thing about the Palestinians in the area supporting Germany and opposing the UK during the war.

ww2 hapend after the problem started. the pals at the time problem had a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" philosophy at the time.
at the time the majority of irish people supported germany. the leader at the time was highly anti-semitic. at the end of his days, about the 60's i think, he did manage to get rid of the jews in ireland. so do the jews have a right to take irish land? italians? croatians? romanians? sweedish? norwiegians?
please note the person i mentioned is someone i refere to as "the yanky bastard". he is the masscot of the current gov. note my party is the main opposition.

?? in WW1 or what?

Try reading the thread. I know it's hard. Wipe the slobber off the screen and hit the "back" button a few times.

Now what? The Jews did not just desire a state? They did not just want to escape persecution? They just wanted Palestine?
So there is in fact even less reason for Palestinians to share their already tiny land with foreigners.

The Jews have as much claim as they do. Just because the Romans scattered them around the world doesn't change that. I really don't see the problem for Jews wanting a homeland there as they have historical claim as well.

Admit it, you only want to see Arabs under oppression, that's all.

And you wish Hitler had finished the job with the Jews, don't you?

ww2 hapend after the problem started. the pals at the time problem had a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" philosophy at the time.
at the time the majority of irish people supported germany. the leader at the time was highly anti-semitic. at the end of his days, about the 60's i think, he did manage to get rid of the jews in ireland. so do the jews have a right to take irish land? italians? croatians? romanians? sweedish? norwiegians?
please note the person i mentioned is someone i refere to as "the yanky bastard". he is the masscot of the current gov. note my party is the main opposition.

Had there been hundreds of thousands of jews in Ireland and Ireland rose up in open revolt, yes, they should have lost their land if it was sectioned off. The UK actually refrained from allowing more there to try and keep the peace before the war.

Apparently, you lack a generel understanding of the history. The Jewish state is not in foreign land, it's in their homeland. The Hebrews/Jews were kicked out of Israel in something B.C by the Romans. This is called Diaspora. When the Hebrews/Jews started to return to their homeland/holyland after WWII, the Muslims formed terror groups to kill and terrorize the Jews so they wouldn't move back to their homeland. This is why the U.N partitioned the land, so each religion can have their own piece of land in the area. Muslim countries didn't want to abide by the partition plan, and started war. The Muslims lost, the Jews won, they (Muslims) started a war and lost, therefore it is the fault of no one else but their own that Israel exists.

If you want to go further back in history, Israel was a Jewish land even before it was a Muslim land because Judiasm is older than Islam. The real immigrants of the lands are the Muslims. When Islam was first born, the Arabs (from Arabic countries) moved to Palestine because important religious leaders from Islam lived there. The Palestinians/Muslims are the ones who truly don't belong there. In conclusion, Israel is a Jewish/Hebrew land, not an Arab/Muslim land.Palestine has not been the European Jews' homeland in centuries. They had their homelands elsewhere. The Jews who immigrated to Palestine in the 20th century were foreigners in the land.

And if you really should want to go back very far in history I am afraid to inform you that the area today named Palestine has always been under Egyptian dominance in very ancient times, long before any Hebrews even left northern Mesopotamia, and long before any Israelites or Jews even existed. So following that Egyptians would be the only legitimate owners of the land.

Apparently, you lack a generel understanding of the history. The Jewish state is not in foreign land, it's in their homeland. The Hebrews/Jews were kicked out of Israel in something B.C by the Romans. This is called Diaspora. When the Hebrews/Jews started to return to their homeland/holyland after WWII, the Muslims formed terror groups to kill and terrorize the Jews so they wouldn't move back to their homeland. This is why the U.N partitioned the land, so each religion can have their own piece of land in the area. Muslim countries didn't want to abide by the partition plan, and started war. The Muslims lost, the Jews won, they (Muslims) started a war and lost, therefore it is the fault of no one else but their own that Israel exists.

If you want to go further back in history, Israel was a Jewish land even before it was a Muslim land because Judiasm is older than Islam. The real immigrants of the lands are the Muslims. When Islam was first born, the Arabs (from Arabic countries) moved to Palestine because important religious leaders from Islam lived there. The Palestinians/Muslims are the ones who truly don't belong there. In conclusion, Israel is a Jewish/Hebrew land, not an Arab/Muslim land.

your information is flawed.
the jews returned aroubd 1870. arabs where there at the same time as the jews. then became a christian territory. then arab in around 660ad. christians have more of a claim than jews if you want to go by possion that long ago.

your information is flawed.
the jews returned aroubd 1870. arabs where there at the same time as the jews. then became a christian territory. then arab in around 660ad. christians have more of a claim than jews if you want to go by possion that long ago.

So then the UK could do what it wanted w/ it?

for a reality tv show we should blonk a million jews in northren ireland to see will will the power struggle.
for those unaware anti-semitic attacks are common. the protestant terrorists are friends with the german neo-nazi ones.

Palestine has not been the European Jews' homeland in centuries. They had their homelands elsewhere. The Jews who immigrated to Palestine in the 20th century were foreigners in the land. Learn the meaning of Diaspora, plus Jews already lived in "Palestine" during this time.

And if you really should want to go back very far in history I am afraid to inform you that the area today named Palestine has always been under Egyptian dominance in very ancient times, long before any Hebrews even left northern Mesopotamia, and long before any Israelites or Jews even existed. So following that Egyptians would be the only legitimate owners of the land.

Thank you for admitting that the land always belonged to the Hebrews/Jews and Arabs are the true visitors of the land. You contradicted yourself, by saying that the Egyptians are the owners. HEBREWS are the owners of the land.


Sorry I don't know why it posted 3 times, I edited and it came out more than once.

Palestine has not been the European Jews' homeland in centuries. They had their homelands elsewhere. The Jews who immigrated to Palestine in the 20th century were foreigners in the land.

And if you really should want to go back very far in history I am afraid to inform you that the area today named Palestine has always been under Egyptian dominance in very ancient times, long before any Hebrews even left northern Mesopotamia, and long before any Israelites or Jews even existed. So following that Egyptians would be the only legitimate owners of the land.

Well, I wonder if a few centuries from now if the Palestinians want "their" land back if you will support them reaquiring it or say, that their claim has expired because to much time has gone by. :rolleyes:

Simply because it was under Egyptian hegemony at one time doesn't make it Egyptian. And nations have been in the area even before Egypt became a power. No matter how you try you aren't going to deny the Jews their claim on the land.

The Jews have as much claim as they do. Just because the Romans scattered them around the world doesn't change that. I really don't see the problem for Jews wanting a homeland there as they have historical claim as well. No they just don't. There is no such thing as a 'historical claim'. As I said many times before: Jews had their lives, and possessions, their families, their land elsewhere. Then out of the blue they expected Arabs, who lived in Palestine since ancient times, to just go away and leave everything to the Jews. It seems you are incapable of an Arab perspective. And you only look at them collectively, you don't see the individuals and their desperate efforts to just keep their little lives going. You are an anti-Arabist and thus an anti-Semite, if you demand the to accept the unjustifiable partition and giving aways of their homeland, of the soil their families have tilled and which supported their lives for centuries.

So then the UK could do what it wanted w/ it?

vatican. by what people are proposing. uk isnt the head of christianity. i vote vatican on the basis is has older links with the christians of that time.

No they just don't. There is no such thing as a 'historical claim'. As I said many times before: Jews had their lives, and possessions, their families, their land elsewhere. Then out of the blue they expected Arabs, who lived in Palestine since ancient times, to just go away and leave everything to the Jews. It seems you are incapable of an Arab perspective. And you only look at them collectively, you don't see the individuals and their desperate efforts to just keep their little lives going. You are an anti-Arabist and thus an anti-Semite, if you demand the to accept the unjustifiable partition and giving aways of their homeland, of the soil their families have tilled and which supported their lives for centuries.


You are in denial....Just accept the fact that Israel is Hebrew/Jewish...NOT ARAB/MUSLIM!

Learn the meaning of Diaspora, plus Jews already lived in "Palestine" during this time.I know the meaning of Diaspora. Plus those Jews didn't make the problem. It's the European Jews who suddenly wanted a state.

Thank you for admitting that the land always belonged to the Hebrews/Jews and Arabs are the true visitors of the land. You contradicted yourself, by saying that the Egyptians are the owners. HEBREWS are the owners of the land.Arabs are partially Hebrew. Arabs are what Arameans, Hebrews, Canaanites, Hurrites, some Hittites, Amalekites, Ammonites, Phoenicians, etc etc have merged into. They have always been there. Unlike European Jews.
And Hebrews no longer exist.

Actually, its rocks and soil and is thus fairly indifferent to who kills who for what on it.

No they just don't. There is no such thing as a 'historical claim'. As I said many times before: Jews had their lives, and possessions, their families, their land elsewhere. Then out of the blue they expected Arabs, who lived in Palestine since ancient times, to just go away and leave everything to the Jews. It seems you are incapable of an Arab perspective. And you only look at them collectively, you don't see the individuals and their desperate efforts to just keep their little lives going. You are an anti-Arabist and thus an anti-Semite, if you demand the to accept the unjustifiable partition and giving aways of their homeland, of the soil their families have tilled and which supported their lives for centuries.

As I see it the Arabs and Jews have equal claim. And what you seem to fail to understand is that since the Jews were expelled from their lands in Roman times they have been refugees, wandering around Europe and at the mercy of anti-Semite regimes. They have hardly had a good time and the idea that they made new homes elsewhere is ridiculous. They were at the mercy of the monarchs of Europe, at any time they could be expelled as they were from Spain in 1492. They never acquired new homes anywhere. The two people could live side by side and as I've said previously repeatedly they could have but the Palestinians decided to get violent. no matter how hard you try you are not going to be able to disguise your hatred for Jews. Your last sentence here is not going to advance your arguement either. Suddenly I don't like Arabs because I support Israels right to exist, eh? Better watch it, you seem to actually believe their propaganda.

Actually, its rocks and soil and is thus fairly indifferent to who kills who for what on it.

assuming your satement is 100% correct.
would then agree fault falls on the one who started it, is a bigger power and has killed more civilians.

assuming your satement is 100% correct.
would then agree fault falls on the one who started it, is a bigger power and has killed more civilians.

Nice that you can so easily claim to know who "started it".

As I see it the Arabs and Jews have equal claim. And what you seem to fail to understand is that since the Jews were expelled from their lands in Roman times they have been refugees, wandering around Europe and at the mercy of anti-Semite regimes. They have hardly had a good time and the idea that they made new homes elsewhere is ridiculous. They were at the mercy of the monarchs of Europe, at any time they could be expelled as they were from Spain in 1492. They never acquired new homes anywhere. The two people could live side by side and as I've said previously repeatedly they could have but the Palestinians decided to get violent. no matter how hard you try you are not going to be able to disguise your hatred for Jews. Your last sentence here is not going to advance your arguement either.So you chose to dwell on long past history instead of looking at the real situation at hand after the end of the Ottoman Empire. That's just bollocks. Jews hadn't been refugees all the time. They in fact settled down and they did in fact acquire new homes. They were not nomades, as you imply.
There is no way that a foreigner has the same right to a piece of land than its actual inhabitants whose families had been living of the soil since ancient times. They never went away. And now you punish them for just existing.

Actually, its rocks and soil and is thus fairly indifferent to who kills who for what on it.Soil is what feeds people. People have every right and reason to kill anyone who invades their land and tries to take their basis of living.

So you chose to dwell on long past history instead of looking at the real situation at hand after the end of the Ottoman Empire. That's just bollocks. Jews hadn't been refugees all the time. They in fact settled down and they did in fact acquire new homes. They were not nomades, as you imply.
There is no way that a foreigner has the same right to a piece of land than its actual inhabitants whose families had been living of the soil since ancient times. They never went away. And now you punish them for just existing.

History is what counts. You are claiming the Palestinians deserve that land because of events long in the past. And the very idea that the Jews got new homes is simply wrong. Living in new countries where they could be killed or expelled at any time is not a new home. Living in ghettos is not a new home. Living under discriminatory conditions is not an acceptable new home. You clearly don't know what you are talking about. You can not limit yourself to a certain timeframe or you will miss out on a lot of detail to understand the current situation. Jews have a history with that land and now they have it back and once again, the Palestinians could have a state as well, but then they blew it. I don't see how I can make this any plainer. Regardless, even if you could argue 100% effectively that the Jews shouldn't be there, which you can't, it does not excuse the actions of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, et. al. They are still violent killers and they have no excuse. None.

Reading this for all frickin 97 pages of repetitive biased argument for the most part there are a few things I'd like to say.

The jews were persecuted since the time of the romans and the diaspora, a fair bit of that came from christians as well, during all that time they dreamed of having the homeland of their ancestors again where they could be safe and when given the chance they jumped at it. Anyone in that situation would jump at it and I don't blame them. From that point on both Israel, the arabs and the Palestinians (to distinguish them from the other arabs) have made mistakes and done shitty things, and as long as they agonise over these peace will never come.

Gorias I'll be honest you annoy me more than most of the people posting here because of your Israeli/palestine-UK/Ireland comparison. There is very little similarity here apart from death and mistakes. Ah but those like us with celtic blood are hotheaded and drawn to romaticism but seriously open your fucking eyes and look at the whole picture, do you honestly believe Stalin would have given the jews a proper land and left them in peace? He hated the jews almost as much as Hitler. At the time noone in europe and the USA wanted the jews, we threw them into the middle east to get rid of them as much as anything else, not to create a foothold or any of the paranoid conspiracies.

I don't intend to come back otherwise I'll start :headbang:

At the time noone in europe and the USA wanted the jews, we threw them into the middle east to get rid of them as much as anything else, not to create a foothold or any of the paranoid conspiracies.

Very good point. I can't believe I forgot this myself. :headbang:

History is what counts. You are claiming the Palestinians deserve that land because of events long in the past. And the very idea that the Jews got new homes is simply wrong. Living in new countries where they could be killed or expelled at any time is not a new home. Living in ghettos is not a new home. Living under discriminatory conditions is not an acceptable new home. You clearly don't know what you are talking about. You can not limit yourself to a certain timeframe or you will miss out on a lot of detail to understand the current situation. Jews have a history with that land and now they have it back and once again, the Palestinians could have a state as well, but then they blew it. I don't see how I can make this any plainer. Regardless, even if you could argue 100% effectively that the Jews shouldn't be there, which you can't, it does not excuse the actions of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, et. al. They are still violent killers and they have no excuse. None.I do obviously understand the current situation better than you do. Jews came and took and expected the Arabs to accept their mere desire.
The current situation on the ground in the time the Jews began ever more insistingly claiming land is all that counts. After the end of the Ottoman Empire only 10% or so of the population in the region was Jewish, so to give them or even promise them more than they already had clearly violated the Arabs' entitlement of self-determination as a people finally free of foreign rule. All you want to see is the continued foreign rule over the area. Turk, Brits, Jews. There is no reason to accept that. Ever.
The Zionist claim on Palestine is baseless.

i doubt wikipedia makes up areas that are also on maps. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Autonomous_Oblast#Jews_in_the_region)

heres a snipet.

The Jewish administrative division was founded with the help of Komzet in 1928 as the Jewish National District. It was the result of Stalin's nationality policy, by which each of the national groups that formed the Soviet Union would receive a territory in which to pursue cultural autonomy in a socialist framework. In that sense, it was also a response to two supposed threats to the Soviet state: Judaism, which ran counter to official state policy of atheism; and Zionism, and the creation of the modern State of Israel, which countered Soviet views of nationalism. The idea was to create a new "Soviet Zion", where a proletarian Jewish culture could be developed. Yiddish, rather than Hebrew, would be the national language, and a new socialist literature and arts would replace religion as the primary expression of culture.

I love the bolded part. A new socialist lit and arts would replace religion? No wonder it was turned down. You sir, have been served.

The Jews have as much claim as they do. Just because the Romans scattered them around the world doesn't change that. I really don't see the problem for Jews wanting a homeland there as they have historical claim as well.

That's about the 100th time this was mentioned. He has not gotten it through his head yet.

That's about the 100th time this was mentioned. He has not gotten it through his head yet.

maybe, just at a guess, the 'problem' is that there were peoplw living there who didn't particularly enjoy being expelled from their land? :rolleyes:

Palestine has not been the European Jews' homeland in centuries. They had their homelands elsewhere. The Jews who immigrated to Palestine in the 20th century were foreigners in the land.

And where did these so called european jews come from? OH YEA!!! The MIDDLE EAST!!!!!

And if you really should want to go back very far in history I am afraid to inform you that the area today named Palestine has always been under Egyptian dominance in very ancient times, long before any Hebrews even left northern Mesopotamia, and long before any Israelites or Jews even existed. So following that Egyptians would be the only legitimate owners of the land.

WRONG!!!!!

No they just don't. There is no such thing as a 'historical claim'.

Then the Palestinians can't claim it then either as there is no such thing as a historical claim.

maybe, just at a guess, the 'problem' is that there were peoplw living there who didn't particularly enjoy being expelled from their land? :rolleyes:

As been stated numerous times, BOTH SIDES EXPELLED PEOPLE!!!! Gah! how hard is that for people to understand??

WRONG!!!!!

You don't just scream WRONG!!!!! at someone,it makes you look a fool.Back it up,or you're arguments just going to crumble.

You don't just scream WRONG!!!!! at someone,it makes you look a fool.Back it up,or you're arguments just going to crumble.

If you have read this thread from the very beginning, wrong is all I need to answer as it has been explained numerous times.

Well, one thing is certain - they can't lay claim to the entirety of Jerusalem. They've exceeded their claims where Jerusalem is concerned.

Well, one thing is certain - they can't lay claim to the entirety of Jerusalem. They've exceeded their claims where Jerusalem is concerned.

considering they sacked the city and destroyed it in ancient times.

considering they sacked the city and destroyed it in ancient times.

Didn't you dismiss claims based on antiquity earlier?

As been stated numerous times, BOTH SIDES EXPELLED PEOPLE!!!! Gah! how hard is that for people to understand??

whats hard to understand? the zionists who stole the land dont even have the common decency to even admit they did it.

im a celt whose ancestors came from the south of france. am i entitled to a pad in the cote d'azur today? am i fuck.

first step to solving the problem is to stop blaming 'them' for everything. jews are no longer victims

ww2 hapend after the problem started. the pals at the time problem had a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" philosophy at the time.
at the time the majority of irish people supported germany. the leader at the time was highly anti-semitic. at the end of his days, about the 60's i think, he did manage to get rid of the jews in ireland. so do the jews have a right to take irish land? italians? croatians? romanians? sweedish? norwiegians?
please note the person i mentioned is someone i refere to as "the yanky bastard". he is the masscot of the current gov. note my party is the main opposition.
You have no idea about Irish history. The IRA supported Germany in WWII, only because they were against Britain. Eamonn de Valera cracked down on the IRA because of this. The Jews of Ireland were not expelled as you imply, they emigrated due to bad economic conditions and lack of other Jews. They mostly went to England, New York, and Israel.

History is what counts. You are claiming the Palestinians deserve that land because of events long in the past. And the very idea that the Jews got new homes is simply wrong. Living in new countries where they could be killed or expelled at any time is not a new home. Living in ghettos is not a new home. Living under discriminatory conditions is not an acceptable new home. You clearly don't know what you are talking about. You can not limit yourself to a certain timeframe or you will miss out on a lot of detail to understand the current situation. Jews have a history with that land and now they have it back and once again, the Palestinians could have a state as well, but then they blew it. I don't see how I can make this any plainer. Regardless, even if you could argue 100% effectively that the Jews shouldn't be there, which you can't, it does not excuse the actions of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, et. al. They are still violent killers and they have no excuse. None.
You win the thread.

Didn't you dismiss claims based on antiquity earlier?

Nope.

You have no idea about Irish history. The IRA supported Germany in WWII, only because they were against Britain. Eamonn de Valera cracked down on the IRA because of this. The Jews of Ireland were not expelled as you imply, they emigrated due to bad economic conditions and lack of other Jews. They mostly went to England, New York, and Israel.

as an aside, the IRA never actually supported the Nazi's. They did send a delegation to Berlin, but the Nazi's decided they would use the Facist Blueshirts as their proxy force and promptly bumped off the IRA men.

Frank Ryans autobiography is a quality read.

there is a small, but well established jewish community in Dublin. Gorias should go and talk to some of them before coming out with that sort of crap.