NationStates Jolt Archive

To anyone who would normally be critical of Israel in a debate and supportive of the Palestians in a discussion on the subject, I would ask you please to defend the continued violation of the cease fire.

Source (http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/About+the+Ministry/MFA+Spokesman/2006/Israel+to+protest+Kassam+fire+before+Security+Council+25-Dec-2006.htm)

25 Dec 2006
Israel's protest is to note that the continued firing of rockets is a grave assault on Israel's sovereignty and its citizenry, and to warn that it represents a serious danger to peace and security in the region.

(Communicated by the Foreign Ministry Spokesman)

Israel's ambassador to the United Nations has been instructed to submit an urgent protest to the duty president of the UN Security Council strongly condemning Palestinian violations of the November 25 cease-fire. The protest is to note that, since the cease-fire went into effect, 53 Kassam rockets have been fired into Israel, causing widespread shock trauma to residents and damage to property.

Israel strongly protests against the continued firing of Kassam rockets at its territory, despite the declared cease-fire and Israel's recent gestures to the Palestinian Authority, as a result of the meeting Saturday night (23 December) between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

Israel's protest is to note that the continued firing of rockets is a grave assault on Israel's sovereignty and its citizenry, and to warn that it represents a serious danger to peace and security in the region, one that is liable to lead to a renewed conflagration between the sides.

Israel is to ask the Security Council to convey its serious protest and warning to the UN Secretary-General and to the Palestinian side, which it accuses of acts of provocation.

The formal protest is to note that no country in the world would tolerate the unceasing firing of rockets into its territory, and point out that Israel has the right to defend itself under Article 51 of the UN Charter. Israel has shown restraint and has refrained from responding at this stage, but is to warn the Security Council that such restraint cannot continue for long.

Over the past week, 24 Kassam rockets have been fired at Israel from the Gaza Strip. Those hitting the town of Sderot have wounded one resident, caused shock trauma to others, and damaged a bank and a nursery school

There is no defence. This is exactly what has happened to every other ceasefire: Israel and Palestine agree to a ceasefire. Palestine fails to hold up it's end. Israel takes it for a time, then responds. Israel gets blamed.

It's insane.

Settlement building is warfare by other means. Arrests continue, checkpoints continue, the occupation grinds on.

Until Israel stops building more settlements in Palestinian territory, there's not going to be a ceasefire.

They'll put houses up, and then Islamic Jihad or whoever will fire Qassams into the settlement, followed by Israeli airstrikes, and then a whole load of retaliatory crap from both sides.

Olmert really needs to think about what'll bring peace to the area. Building more settlements in Palestinian land whilst claiming a ceasefire is doing no good at all.

If the Israelis would give the land they and absentee Arab land-owners cheated the Palestinians out of back to its rightful owners, it would all be over.

[QUOTE=Neo Sanderstead;12152121]To anyone who would normally be critical of Israel in a debate and supportive of the Palestians in a discussion on the subject, I would ask you please to defend the continued violation of the cease fire.

<snip>

Wasn't there a thread around here about Israel authorizing settlement of territory not theirs to authorize?

There is no defence. This is exactly what has happened to every other ceasefire: Israel and Palestine agree to a ceasefire. Palestine fails to hold up it's end. Israel takes it for a time, then responds. Israel gets blamed.

It's insane.

I agree.

I'm not sure why Israel bothers even to deal with the UN. As I see the UN they seem to back the Palestinians more so than Israel. It's absurd. The UN isn't going to do anything to stop the Palestinians.

I say it's time Israel take their restraints off and go head on and in Full Force vs the Hamas led Palestine Authority.

Israel could easily dismantle most of the settlements in the West Bank which would go a long way to easing tensions. Without those illegal settlements making life difficult for Israel internationally I see the world caring a lot more if terrorist attacks continue despite this gesture.

Until Israel stops building more settlements in Palestinian territory, there's not going to be a ceasefire.

They'll put houses up, and then Islamic Jihad or whoever will fire Qassams into the settlement, followed by Israeli airstrikes, and then a whole load of retaliatory crap from both sides.

Olmert really needs to think about what'll bring peace to the area. Building more settlements in Palestinian land whilst claiming a ceasefire is doing no good at all.

You know what, it doesn't really matter what Israel does, the Palestinians and other Arab nations are determined to continually harass and shoot rockets off into Israel until Israel's demise or as Iran puts it "wiped off of the map".

It's time Israel stops holding back and turn their defense strategies to a Full Force Offensive.

You know what, it doesn't really matter what Israel does, the Palestinians and other Arab nations are determined to continually harass and shoot rockets off into Israel until Israel's demise or as Iran puts it "wiped off of the map".

It's time Israel stops holding back and turn their defense strategies to a Full Force Offensive.
Because that’s what Jesus would want.

I agree.

I'm not sure why Israel bothers even to deal with the UN. As I see the UN they seem to back the Palestinians more so than Israel. It's absurd.
It's not absurd in the slightest. The Palestinians don't have their own proper state, so it's hard to actually do anything against them at all. Most states already cut off aid after Hamas was fairly voted in *sighs*, so there's not much else you can really do. Most European countries also don't actually give preference to Israel over Palestine in the same way as the US - we prefer to stay more neutral on the issue, than the US which immediately vetoes everything against Israel, even simple condemnations.

That, plus the fact that Israel has done its fair share of harm to the Middle East, and a fair deal of especially terrible things in Lebanon (the Sabra and Shatila massacre, and the fact that the IDF completely ignored what was going on, especially, as well as the various shellings of the Lebanese population) really hasn't ingratiated it to much of the world at all, and Europe in particular has basically had enough of Israel's crap right now.
The UN isn't going to do anything to stop the Palestinians.
Because it doesn't have a real state, and since everyone pulled out any support they gave after Hamas were fairly elected, there's no real point any more.
I say it's time Israel take their restraints off and go head on and in Full Force vs the Hamas led Palestine Authority.
Nice way to utterly annihilate democracy there, as well as show the world why Israel isn't even the beginnings of to be trusted with any kind of military force.

The EU would actually decide to just show that it's had enough of Israel. We came very, very close to calling for sanctions and an immediate ceasefire in the UN over what it did to Lebanon.

You know what, it doesn't really matter what Israel does, the Palestinians and other Arab nations are determined to continually harass and shoot rockets off into Israel until Israel's demise or as Iran puts it "wiped off of the map".
And what, may I ask, has Israel actually done to ingratiate itself to the region?

Killed a whole load of people, taken a lot of Arab land as the spoils of war, and generally pissed in everyone's drinks. Nice one.

If it actually talked to people and gave them back their land, then maybe it might have some respect from the general population of the Arab world. At the moment, it's done nothing but earn contempt - especially since its every action is supported by the US, which is no friend at all of the Arab world.
It's time Israel stops holding back and turn their defense strategies to a Full Force Offensive.
No, it isn't at all.

If it did that, it'd be invaded in return by most of Europe, methinks. We've had enough of Israel as it is. If they started blowing people up and generally being very imperial in the Middle East, I think we'd put and end to it.

The EU would actually decide to just show that it's had enough of Israel. We came very, very close to calling for sanctions and an immediate ceasefire in the UN over what it did to Lebanon.

Out of interest, what do you think Israel should have done about Hezbollah's attacks?

I agree.

I'm not sure why Israel bothers even to deal with the UN. As I see the UN they seem to back the Palestinians more so than Israel. It's absurd. The UN isn't going to do anything to stop the Palestinians.
Ohh, you're right! Why is the international community always picking on the occupying power? Surely it's got nothing to do with the UN resolutions they refuse to comply with - and the continued breach of international law, well, that's just not the business of the UN is it.

Damn you UN! Especially the member states of the Security Council, every one of them always picking on poor Israel!

:rolleyes:

Until Israel stops building more settlements in Palestinian territory, there's not going to be a ceasefire.


Settlement building has nothing to do with it, the Palestians agreed that they would stop firing. If they didnt agree with the settlements, they shouldnt have agreed to stop firing. They have and thus they are going back on their word

If it actually talked to people and gave them back their land, then maybe it might have some respect from the general population of the Arab world. At the moment, it's done nothing but earn contempt - especially since its every action is supported by the US, which is no friend at all of the Arab world.

Erm, the 2000 proposals? 95% of the West Bank, all of Gaza and the Arab neighboguhods of East Jerusalem. That isnt talking to them and offering to give things up.

The problem is that neither side wants a 50-50 compromise.

If the Israelis would give the land they and absentee Arab land-owners cheated the Palestinians out of back to its rightful owners, it would all be over.

The whole "absentee Arab land-owner" thing is a myth. Only 7% of the land was bought by settlers. Nor is this relevant to today, where its a far more straightforward case of occupation and colonisation.

Ohh, you're right! Why is the international community always picking on the occupying power? Surely it's got nothing to do with the UN resolutions they refuse to comply with - and the continued breach of international law, well, that's just not the business of the UN is it.

Damn you UN! Especially the member states of the Security Council, every one of them always picking on poor Israel!

:rolleyes:

And that pesky international law that says Israel can't build settlements in the occupied territories...

Ohh, you're right! Why is the international community always picking on the occupying power? Surely it's got nothing to do with the UN resolutions they refuse to comply with - and the continued breach of international law, well, that's just not the business of the UN is it.

Damn you UN! Especially the member states of the Security Council, every one of them always picking on poor Israel!

:rolleyes:

Currently, the occupation only continues to protect Israel. The Gaza withdrawl demonstrates this well. Israel withdraw from Gaza, and the rocket attacks from their increase, even during the cease fire.

Settlement building has nothing to do with it, the Palestians agreed that they would stop firing. If they didnt agree with the settlements, they shouldnt have agreed to stop firing. They have and thus they are going back on their word

According to you and the "apologise for Israel" community it hasn't...

And that pesky international law that says Israel can't build settlements in the occupied territories...

Could you please identify said law.

According to you and the "apologise for Israel" community it hasn't...

No, logically it doesnt. If the Palestians were still angry with settlement building, then they shouldnt of agreed a cease fire. A cease fire means that you do not attack the other party. That is what you agree to. You dont just suddenly say "yeah but they do this..." and start firing again. You have made a promise. There are plenty of things that the Isralies could say the Palestians have done to them, but they have shown restraint and are not firing. Because they have made an agreement.

No, logically it doesnt. If the Palestians were still angry with settlement building, then they shouldnt of agreed a cease fire. A cease fire means that you do not attack the other party. That is what you agree to. You dont just suddenly say "yeah but they do this..." and start firing again. You have made a promise. There are plenty of things that the Isralies could say the Palestians have done to them, but they have shown restraint and are not firing. Because they have made an agreement.

As the building was announced after the ceasefire, its fairly obvious what was going on there.

As for law, they are illegal under the Geneva convention, and have been declared illegal by the UN security council.

Are you a defender of colonisation now?

The whole "absentee Arab land-owner" thing is a myth. Only 7% of the land was bought by settlers. Nor is this relevant to today, where its a far more straightforward case of occupation and colonisation.
7% isn't a myth. I merely wish to be inclusive in my condemnation.
Also, I hardly see either colonization or occupation as worthy positions to hold on the issue.

The new settlement was also announced after the ceasefire was broken by rockets being fired. I don't agree with the building of a new settlement I'd rather see settlements removed but the rocket firing cannot be justified by the settlement announcement just as the settlement shouldn't be justified by the rockets.

Because that’s what Jesus would want.

Nice argument. :rolleyes:

7% isn't a myth. I merely wish to be inclusive in my condemnation.
Also, I hardly see either colonization or occupation as worthy positions to hold on the issue.


The usual version states that "the land" (no figure ever supplied) was bought from Absentee landlords and thats why the Palestinians ended out on their ear. In reality very very few were affected by the land purchases of settlers.

As for law, they are illegal under the Geneva convention, and have been declared illegal by the UN security council.

Are you a defender of colonisation now?

Building settlements =/= colonisation. And here's why

The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the forcible transfer of people of one state to the territory of another state that it has occupied as a result of a war. The intention was to insure that local populations who came under occupation would not be forced to move. This is in no way relevant to the settlement issue. Jews are not being forced to go to the West Bank and Gaza Strip; on the contrary, they are voluntarily moving back to places where they, or their ancestors, once lived before being expelled by others. In addition, those territories never legally belonged to either Jordan or Egypt, and certainly not to the Palestinians, who were never the sovereign authority in any part of Palestine. "The Jewish right of settlement in the area is equivalent in every way to the right of the local population to live there," according to Professor Eugene Rostow, former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs.

As a matter of policy, moreover, Israel does not requisition private land for the establishment of settlements. Housing construction is allowed on private land only after determining that no private rights will be violated. The settlements also do not displace Arabs living in the territories. The media sometimes gives the impression that for every Jew who moves to the West Bank, several hundred Palestinians are forced to leave. The truth is that the vast majority of settlements have been built in uninhabited areas and even the handful established in or near Arab towns did not force any Palestinians to leave.

While making a strong case for its right to the territories, the Israeli government also acknowledges that Palestinians have legitimate claims to the area and that a compromise can be reached through negotiations:

Politically, the West Bank and Gaza Strip is best regarded as territory over which there are competing claims which should be resolved in peace process negotiations. Israel has valid claims to title in this territory based not only on its historic and religious connection to the land, and its recognized security needs, but also on the fact that the territory was not under the sovereignty of any state and came under Israeli control in a war of self-defense, imposed upon Israel. At the same time, Israel recognizes that the Palestinians also entertain legitimate claims to the area. Indeed, the very fact that the parties have agreed to conduct negotiations on settlements indicated that they envisage a compromise on this issue.

In fact, in the 2000 negotiations at Camp David and the White House, Prime Minister Barak reportedly offered to dismantle at least 63 settlements.10 The Palestinians rejected the proposal.

In 2004, Ariel Sharon proposed a plan to disengage from the Gaza Strip and parts of the West Bank. That proposal also would lead to the removal of a number of settlements. At the same time, Sharon has made clear that large settlement blocs will remain intact. An estimated 80 percent of the settlers live in what are in effect suburbs of major Israeli cities such as Jerusalem and Tel Aviv. Virtually the entire Jewish population believes Israel must retain these areas to ensure its security, and that they could be brought within Israel's borders with minor modifications of the 1967 border.

Sharon singled out four specific settlement blocs that, by consensus, will ultimately be incorporated into Israel, and it is evident why when you take into account their populations: Ariel (16,000 in 2001 and now closer to 30,000 when surrounding communities are included), Maale Adumim (25,800 in 2001 and now closer to 40,000), Givat Zeev (10,500 in 2001), and the Etzion Bloc (15 communities with an approximate population of 20,000). These four blocs include more than 40 percent of the total Jewish population of the West Bank. It is inconceivable that Israel would evacuate such large cities, even after a peace agreement with the Palestinians, and Yasser Arafat grudgingly accepted at Camp David the idea that the large settlement blocs would be part of Israel

Nice argument. :rolleyes:
I thought so.

Until Israel stops building more settlements in Palestinian territory, there's not going to be a ceasefire.

They'll put houses up, and then Islamic Jihad or whoever will fire Qassams into the settlement, followed by Israeli airstrikes, and then a whole load of retaliatory crap from both sides.

Olmert really needs to think about what'll bring peace to the area. Building more settlements in Palestinian land whilst claiming a ceasefire is doing no good at all.

Yes because pulling out of the Gaza settlements worked so well:rolleyes:

The settlements aren't what the rockets are launched at. They are launching within Israeli borders. Israel has every right to start shelling Gaza right now.

It's not absurd in the slightest. The Palestinians don't have their own proper state, so it's hard to actually do anything against them at all. Most states already cut off aid after Hamas was fairly voted in *sighs*, so there's not much else you can really do. Most European countries also don't actually give preference to Israel over Palestine in the same way as the US - we prefer to stay more neutral on the issue, than the US which immediately vetoes everything against Israel, even simple condemnations.

I disagree, it's absurdity at its best. Condemning them is a start but the UN and other nations priority seems to be condemning Israel for their self defense acts. You may "*sigh*" all you wish but to me it seems the most appropriate thing to do to cut off financial aid to a known terrorist organization as Hamas who claims openly to continually attack Israel until they're destroyed. I'm well aware that "Most European countries also don't actually give preference to Israel over Palestine in the same way as the US" Possibly the reason for the US vetoes in the UN might be due to the fact that the UN does not have good intentions or causes in regards to Israel.

That, plus the fact that Israel has done its fair share of harm to the Middle East, and a fair deal of especially terrible things in Lebanon (the Sabra and Shatila massacre, and the fact that the IDF completely ignored what was going on, especially, as well as the various shellings of the Lebanese population) really hasn't ingratiated it to much of the world at all, and Europe in particular has basically had enough of Israel's crap right now.

I find it quite amusing how you come to the defense of Hezbollah acts of attacking Israel as they hide within and behind the schools, mosques, hospitals, and other civilian populated areas as to make sure that Israel does hit the civilian population and then cry to the world and blame Israel first. It's time the terrorists start taking accountability for their actions and to STOP using civilians as Human Sheilds as I believe that is also illegal and goes against the Intn'l Laws and Rules of War. Oops, I forgot, there's fine print somewheres that states the terrorists are exempt from any such laws. :rolleyes:

Because it doesn't have a real state, and since everyone pulled out any support they gave after Hamas were fairly elected, there's no real point any more.

As they should have and I commend them for it.

Nice way to utterly annihilate democracy there, as well as show the world why Israel isn't even the beginnings of to be trusted with any kind of military force.

I wholeheartedly would have to disagree considering the facts of Israel is under constant, daily rocket attacks and suicide bombers. Could you imagine what destruction would occur by having Israel disarm themselves. Now you're talking about revisiting the holocaust unless you believe as the Iranian President that the holocaust was a myth. :rolleyes:

The EU would actually decide to just show that it's had enough of Israel. We came very, very close to calling for sanctions and an immediate ceasefire in the UN over what it did to Lebanon.

Honestly, other than this becoming ever so hilarious, it really would be pointless for you, the EU, to get UN sanctions or resolutions reminding you that the USA does and has shown it has no hesitation in any vetoe actions. And even if a sanction or resolution did become reality against Israel, I remind you the UN has absolutely no back bones when it comes time to enforce them (Iraq comes to mind) of course though I suppose the UN does have plenty of time (decades worth) so they can do what ever they deem right. b:rolleyes:

Could you please identify said law.

As for law, they are illegal under the Geneva convention, and have been declared illegal by the UN security council.

There's your answer.

If the Israelis would give the land they and absentee Arab land-owners cheated the Palestinians out of back to its rightful owners, it would all be over

I noticed your location lists you as living near San Antonio. Care to give back the land you and your ancestors stole from the Mexicans?

It's time Israel stops holding back and turn their defense strategies to a Full Force Offensive.

All they need to do is repatriate the Palestinians into Jordan. That's it. This present half-measure of occupation without annexation is basically a concession of guilt. If they think they are entitled to the land (and basic right of conquest suggests they are), they should act like it.

And what, may I ask, has Israel actually done to ingratiate itself to the region?

I believe they found land that was either abandoned and in no use by anybody. I might be wrong, though.

Killed a whole load of people, taken a lot of Arab land as the spoils of war, and generally pissed in everyone's drinks. Nice one.

They do have the right to defend themselves. Where's your source about the "pissed in everyone's drinks".

If it actually talked to people and gave them back their land, then maybe it might have some respect from the general population of the Arab world. At the moment, it's done nothing but earn contempt - especially since its every action is supported by the US, which is no friend at all of the Arab world
.

They've tried talking but a lot of the Middle East refuses to listen and even if they do talk the Arabs at the tables don't mean what they say in regards to the ceasefire or pull-out or the Peace talks and that's simply because they don't believe in peace and they do believe Israel has the right to exist. I highly believe the only reason that Israel is still is in existence is mainly because of the USA's support and belief in Israel. If the USA had the European Nations vision on the "do nothing" approach regarding Israel's right to exist Israel wouldn't be properly armed to defend themselves and without the USA's support what would stop most of the Middle East from totally ganging up on Israel to completely destroy it which if that would ever occur I could picture the UN and most European Nations twiddling their thumbs saying "Oh well who needs...., oh, we better condemn the Middle East Nations" :rolleyes:

No, it isn't at all.

If it did that, it'd be invaded in return by most of Europe, methinks. We've had enough of Israel as it is. If they started blowing people up and generally being very imperial in the Middle East, I think we'd put and end to it.

Please, stop it you're cracking me up, goodness gracious, you are too funny. :D

I It's time the terrorists start taking accountability for their actions and to STOP using civilians as Human Sheilds as I believe that is also illegal and goes against the Intn'l Laws and Rules of War. Oops, I forgot, there's fine print somewheres that states the terrorists are exempt from any such laws. :rolleyes:

IIRC then the side which uses human shields is held responsible for their deaths under international law. Legally speaking Hezbollah killed far more Lebanese civilians than Israel did.

There's your answer.

Erm, nope. See my previous post.

The Fourth Geneva Convention prohibits the forcible transfer of people of one state to the territory of another state that it has occupied as a result of a war. The intention was to insure that local populations who came under occupation would not be forced to move. This is in no way relevant to the settlement issue. Jews are not being forced to go to the West Bank and Gaza Strip; on the contrary, they are voluntarily moving back to places where they, or their ancestors, once lived before being expelled by others. In addition, those territories never legally belonged to either Jordan or Egypt, and certainly not to the Palestinians, who were never the sovereign authority in any part of Palestine. "The Jewish right of settlement in the area is equivalent in every way to the right of the local population to live there," according to Professor Eugene Rostow, former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs.

As a matter of policy, moreover, Israel does not requisition private land for the establishment of settlements. Housing construction is allowed on private land only after determining that no private rights will be violated. The settlements also do not displace Arabs living in the territories. The media sometimes gives the impression that for every Jew who moves to the West Bank, several hundred Palestinians are forced to leave. The truth is that the vast majority of settlements have been built in uninhabited areas and even the handful established in or near Arab towns did not force any Palestinians to leave.

Ohh, you're right! Why is the international community always picking on the occupying power? Surely it's got nothing to do with the UN resolutions they refuse to comply with - and the continued breach of international law, well, that's just not the business of the UN is it.

Damn you UN! Especially the member states of the Security Council, every one of them always picking on poor Israel!

:rolleyes:

sounds pretty accurate to me.

Building settlements =/= colonisation. And here's why


Its colonisation, and has been declared illegal and invalid by the UN security council. That interpretation you so lovingly splashed all over the place has no currency whatsoever outside of Israel and its supporters.

As at least 40% of settlements are built on land taken illegally from Arabs, please explain in your own words what makes this Apartheid system justified.

Most states already cut off aid after Hamas was fairly voted in *sighs*

Let me put this into terms a liberal mind can understand... if you were a world leader, would you cut off aid when the Neo-Nazis or the KKK were voted in?

I'm glad nobody's paying this terrorist government.

Let me put this into terms a liberal mind can understand... if you were a world leader, would you cut off aid when the Neo-Nazis or the KKK were voted in?

I'm glad nobody's paying this terrorist government.

Yet a state that sets loose a similar bunch of fanatics to build settlements on occupied land doesnt deserve similar treatment?

on the contrary, they are voluntarily moving back to places where they, or their ancestors, once lived before being expelled by others.
"Ancestors"? By that logic and Israeli precedent, the American Indians can legally move themselves back to the South and East and start occupying land currently held or occupied by other people.

All the pro-Israeli people piss and moan about how bad the evil Palestinians are while ignoring and excusing all the bullshit Israel pulls and not only that, but encouraging it. Israel is as faultless as the Palestinian terrorists.

Let me put this into terms a liberal mind can understand... if you were a world leader, would you cut off aid when the Neo-Nazis or the KKK were voted in?

I'm glad nobody's paying this terrorist government.

but if people were encouraged by the 'international community' to vote out the incumbants knowing the KKK was the only alternative?

we pressured the Palestinains to vote Fatah out. When they did we put pressure on them for who they replaced them with.

Farcical stuff

Not to mention visiting the reformist candidate in Fatah to tell him that if he did exercise his right to run against Abbas and be democratically elected, they would not deal with him under any circumstances.

the following is copied from this link: http://www.focusonjerusalem.com/whydidgodchooseisrael.html

Isn't it ironic that out of nearly 200 nations that are in the world today, and of the many thousands of nations that have found a name in history's great roll call, that the one particular nation that God did set aside for his name, has also been the nation that has been the most despised and persecuted.

I highly recommend people to read the pages of the above mentioned link. It truly is interesting. :)

that the one particular nation that God did set aside for his name,

Bollocks, you lose.

the following is copied from this link: http://www.focusonjerusalem.com/whydidgodchooseisrael.html

Isn't it ironic that out of nearly 200 nations that are in the world today, and of the many thousands of nations that have found a name in history's great roll call, that the one particular nation that God did set aside for his name, has also been the nation that has been the most despised and persecuted.

I highly recommend people to read the pages of the above mentioned link. It truly is interesting. :)
What happened in Israel in the past or to Jews anywhere else in the world is irrelevant.
But if you want to go there…
The Roma have received just as much abuse as the Jews, and where’s their state?
And what about central Africans? Enslaved by both Europeans and Muslims, millions of them.
Fuck, homosexuals have been discriminated throughout history the world over, and yet they still don’t have equal rights or even recognition in some of the of the most developed nations on Earth.

sounds pretty accurate to me.

Why do you hate America?

the following is copied from this link: http://www.focusonjerusalem.com/whydidgodchooseisrael.html

Isn't it ironic that out of nearly 200 nations that are in the world today, and of the many thousands of nations that have found a name in history's great roll call, that the one particular nation that God did set aside for his name, has also been the nation that has been the most despised and persecuted.

I highly recommend people to read the pages of the above mentioned link. It truly is interesting. :)
http://texasholdemblogger.wordpress.com/files/2006/08/bullshit-o-meter.gif

http://texasholdemblogger.wordpress.com/files/2006/08/bullshit-o-meter.gif

Excellent arguement, well done..... :rolleyes:

Why do you hate America?

So, now to defend Israel's right to exist and to basically disagree with your anti-Israel stance I must be anti-American, okay, if you say so.... :rolleyes:

Excellent arguement, well done..... :rolleyes:

Says the citer of supposed Bible prophecy.

Says the citer of supposed Bible prophecy.

Thanks for reminding me that atheists and non-believers, in my opinion are over whelmingly higher than that of the christians. *sarcasm* However, I truly believe everything that this, earlier link I posted to be accurate. As you have that right to disagree, I have every right to believe what I do.

Can you furnish me any proof or sources that are cold hard truths (Facts) that counter my beliefs or are you only able to find speculation/opinion or bogus sources?

To anyone

this is the point in the thread where I know there is no point in posting fortunately it was the OP

Thanks for reminding that atheists and non-believers, in my opinion are over whelmingly higher than that of the christians. *sarcasm* However, I truly believe everything that this earlier link I posted to be accurate. As you have that right to disagree, I have every right to believe what I do.

Can you furnish me any proof or sources that are cold hard truths (Facts) that counter my beliefs or are you only able to find speculation/opinion or bogus sources?

Sources for non-existence of land-title-awarded-by-god?

Sources for non-existence of land-title-awarded-by-god?

It's quite amusing how you choose to quote me when I declared that this is how I believe, it's my belief, and then ask for a source, quite amusing indeed. Would you like a source to the definition of a belief? :p

It's quite amusing how you choose to quote me when I declared that this is how I believe, it's my belief, and then ask for a source, quite amusing indeed. Would you like a source to the definition of a belief? :p

So its just bollocks then? Like I said in the first place?

Thanks for reminding me that atheists and non-believers, in my opinion are over whelmingly higher than that of the christians. *sarcasm* However, I truly believe everything that this, earlier link I posted to be accurate. As you have that right to disagree, I have every right to believe what I do.
Can you furnish me any proof or sources that are cold hard truths (Facts) that counter my beliefs or are you only able to find speculation/opinion or bogus sources?

Nodinia:
Key words are Belief and Believe. I think I may see what made you misunderstand when I through in the word accurate, however, "I truly believe", to me anyways, passes the stronger motion that I posted my Belief.

So its just bollocks then? Like I said in the first place?

Well, if that's your opinion then of course......

Well, if that's your opinion then of course......

Its als0 my opinion that I own your house. And everything in it.

I’d still like to know what makes the Jews better than the Gypsies, or the Central Africans, or the gays.

I’d still like to know what makes the Jews better than the Gypsies, or the Central Africans, or the gays.

You obviously didn't read the earlier posted link, I presented, a lot of people have a misunderstanding of what people claim in regards to Israel being the chosen people. Satan at his best, unfortunately.

You obviously didn't read the earlier posted link, I presented, a lot of people have a misunderstanding of what people claim in regards to Israel being the chosen people. Satan at his best, unfortunately.

Do you really expect people to accept a foreign policy based on your religion?

You obviously didn't read the earlier posted link, I presented, a lot of people have a misunderstanding of what people claim in regards to Israel being the chosen people. Satan at his best, unfortunately.
But all that link had was stuff from the Bible, the Old Testament no less, which depicts a very cruel, jealous and unjust God. You’re really going to have to do better than that.
What makes Isreal special?

Do you really expect people to accept a foreign policy based on your religion?

Absolutely not. I do expect to have my own views and beliefs whether they're popular or not.

But all that link had was stuff from the Bible, the Old Testament no less, which depicts a very cruel, jealous and unjust God. You’re really going to have to do better than that.
What makes Isreal special?

Like I said, you obviously did not read the link and if you did you completely misunderstood it....:p

Your declared understanding of what the link has stated it complete opposite of what you're declaring it said. This is why I concluded that you obviously did not read it.

Absolutely not. I do expect to have my own views and beliefs whether they're popular or not.

Fair enough. Just don't expect me to want to pour billions of dollars into some small state on the other side of the world just because some people believe they're a "chosen people of God".

Like I said, you obviously did not read the link and if you did you completely misunderstood it....:p

Your declared understanding of what the link has stated it complete opposite of what you're declaring it said. This is why I concluded that you obviously did not read it.Could somebody help me out here? For his link to have any validity, one would have to accept certain OT beliefs, right? Or am I taking crazy pills?

Could somebody help me out here? For his link to have any validity, one would have to accept certain OT beliefs, right? Or am I taking crazy pills?


Correct. The good news is that he is a "troll". The bad news is that millions do actually think as he pretends to.

I’d still like to know what makes the Jews better than the Gypsies, or the Central Africans, or the gays.

And I'd like to know why the Israelis have to give the land they conquered back to the Arabs, but the Americans don't have to give theirs back to the Mexicans and American Indians, the British don't have to give theirs back to the Celts, the Turks don't have to give parts of their land back to the Mamluks (who in turn ought to cede it back to the Crusaders, and they to the Fatimids), etc.

But just cause you want it doesn't mean you'll get it. :headbang:

And I'd like to know why the Israelis have to give the land they conquered back to the Arabs, but the Americans don't have to give theirs back to the Mexicans and American Indians, the British don't have to give theirs back to the Celts, the Turks don't have to give parts of their land back to the Mamluks (who in turn ought to cede it back to the Crusaders, and they to the Fatimids), etc.

But just cause you want it doesn't mean you'll get it. :headbang:

Because it happened post-WWII when war for land was outlawed.

And in fairness, the British have given (well, 'given' or 'made give') some land back to the 'Celts'. It's called Ireland. :)

And I'd like to know why the Israelis have to give the land they conquered back to the Arabs, but the Americans don't have to give theirs back to the Mexicans and American Indians, the British don't have to give theirs back to the Celts, the Turks don't have to give parts of their land back to the Mamluks (who in turn ought to cede it back to the Crusaders, and they to the Fatimids), etc.

But just cause you want it doesn't mean you'll get it. :headbang:

Because they now have the state of Israel. Enough is enough.

I’d still like to know what makes the Jews better than the Gypsies, or the Central Africans, or the gays.

The fact that the Jews did have a homeland is one. There is also the entire Diaspara Experience. The fact that the Jewish population in America is falling dramatically due to assimilation. Let's face it, Israel is needed in order to protect the Jews as a culture let alone religious group.

Oh yeah, and if homosexuals were given a country, it wouldn't survive unless there was constant immigration.

Because it happened post-WWII when war for land was outlawed.

And in fairness, the British have given (well, 'given' or 'made give') some land back to the 'Celts'. It's called Ireland. :)

Let me put it simply so even you can understand it.

If Israel didn't take land when they defended themselves in 1967, the Arabs would've been sent the message that there were little consequences to losing to Israel. Losing the land is 100% on the fault of the Arabs for starting the war. Tough shit, that's what they deserve for doing so.

You know damn well they wouldn't give any land back if they conquered Israel. If you say otherwise, you're either stupid or a liar.

The fact that the Jews did have a homeland is one. There is also the entire Diaspara Experience. The fact that the Jewish population in America is falling dramatically due to assimilation. Let's face it, Israel is needed in order to protect the Jews as a culture let alone religious group.
There's nothing wrong with assimilation. In fact I encourage as much of it as possible. Best way of achieving world peace.
At any rate, what does it matter if they once had a homeland thousands of years ago? I’m sure at one point the Roma were settled down in one place, and guess what, so were the Central Africans, who also faced their own Diaspara, a far worse one in which families were separated from each other entirely. The US doesn't do shit to help central Africa, whereas we effectively prop up Israel.
Oh yeah, and if homosexuals were given a country, it wouldn't survive unless there was constant immigration.
Yeah, but they could still get equal rights.

Let me put it simply so even you can understand it.

If Israel didn't take land when they defended themselves in 1967, the Arabs would've been sent the message that there were little consequences to losing to Israel. Losing the land is 100% on the fault of the Arabs for starting the war. Tough shit, that's what they deserve for doing so.

You know damn well they wouldn't give any land back if they conquered Israel. If you say otherwise, you're either stupid or a liar.


Firstly, they'd be under sanctions if they didn't get out. Secondly, "deserve" is rather a strange thing to bring in, as the German state was allowed exist after WWII and we know what they did.

There's nothing wrong with assimilation. In fact I encourage as much of it as possible. Best way of achieving world peace.
At any rate, what does it matter if they once had a homeland thousands of years ago? I’m sure at one point the Roma were settled down in one place, and guess what, so were the Central Africans.



Assimilation = the death of the Jews as a people, culture, and religion. It is the worst possible thing that can happen to us.

There is also the fact that the Jews were given the legal promise to a homeland by those who owned the land (The British). That's enough right there. The Balfour Declaration was made binding law when the League of Nations gave Britain the Mandate.

If Israel didn't take land when they defended themselves in 1967, the Arabs would've been sent the message that there were little consequences to losing to Israel. Losing the land is 100% on the fault of the Arabs for starting the war. Tough shit, that's what they deserve for doing so.
I think he’s talking about the taking of land in the first place, after WWII. If he isn’t, I am.

The fact that the Jews did have a homeland is one. There is also the entire Diaspara Experience. The fact that the Jewish population in America is falling dramatically due to assimilation. Let's face it, Israel is needed in order to protect the Jews as a culture let alone religious group.

Oh yeah, and if homosexuals were given a country, it wouldn't survive unless there was constant immigration.

Apart from the "dodginess" of that, theres been a Jewish culture without a state of Israel for a long time.

Assimilation = the death of the Jews as a people, culture, and religion. It is the worst possible thing that can happen to us.

There is also the fact that the Jews were given the legal promise to a homeland by those who owned the land (The British). That's enough right there. The Balfour Declaration was made binding law when the League of Nations gave Britain the Mandate.


And the Arabs were promised independence. Theres now a state of Israel.

Firstly, they'd be under sanctions if they didn't get out. Secondly, "deserve" is rather a strange thing to bring in, as the German state was allowed exist after WWII and we know what they did.

And we know how well the Arabs respond to sanctions. They just bribe UN Officials and pull the oil card and get their way.

The German point is a dumb one and shows disregard to history. Germany existed after WWII because we wanted a buffer between Western Europe and the Soviets.

Assimilation = the death of the Jews as a people, culture, and religion. It is the worst possible thing that can happen to us.
No. The worst possible thing that could happen to your insistance on claiming a hunk of desert starting another World War. No matter how much you want to believe you are, you are not separate from the rest of us. We are all one human race.
There is also the fact that the Jews were given the legal promise to a homeland by those who owned the land (The British). That's enough right there. The Balfour Declaration was made binding law when the League of Nations gave Britain the Mandate.
Britain had no right to give it to your people knowing the trouble it would cause.

And the Arabs were promised independence. Theres now a state of Israel.

They got independence twice. Once when 80% of Palestine became Jordan and then in 1947. It's not Israel's fault that the Palestinians were hell bent on creating another Holocaust.

Let me put it simply so even you can understand it.

If Israel didn't take land when they defended themselves in 1967, the Arabs would've been sent the message that there were little consequences to losing to Israel. Losing the land is 100% on the fault of the Arabs for starting the war. Tough shit, that's what they deserve for doing so.

You know damn well they wouldn't give any land back if they conquered Israel. If you say otherwise, you're either stupid or a liar.

WHOOOOOOSSSSHHHHH

I think he’s talking about the taking of land in the first place, after WWII. If he isn’t, I am.

I am, thanks.

Which would be why I mentioned the words post-WWII.

But hey, when has reading comprehension stopped anyone on NS....

The German point is a dumb one and shows disregard to history. Germany existed after WWII because we wanted a buffer between Western Europe and the Soviets.
Right, we let it exist for pragmatic reason, just as we should not have let Israel exist for pragmatic reasons.

And we know how well the Arabs respond to sanctions. They just bribe UN Officials and pull the oil card and get their way.

The German point is a dumb one and shows disregard to history. Germany existed after WWII because we wanted a buffer between Western Europe and the Soviets.


The idea of oil bribery affecting the UNSC is nonsense, as were that the case, Israel would have been hammered from the get-go. You refuse to acknowledge the German point because it highlights the hypocrisy with regards Palistinians. If there can be an Israeli state, then there can be a Palistinean state.

No. The worst possible thing that could happen to your insistance on claiming a hunk of desert starting another World War. No matter how much you want to believe you are, you are not separate from the rest of us. We are all one human race. You just showed your lack of knowledge on the land. Israel is NOT a desert. I just got back from there and can show you pictures of how beautiful the land is. It is more like Northern California.

Israel and the Jews shouldn't be forced to be put in the diaspara again because a bunch of Arabs are intolerant of another group living in the Middle East.

Britain had no right to give it to you knowing the trouble it would cause.

The UK had every legal right to promise the Jews that. They had the land afterall.

. It's not Israel's fault that the Palestinians were hell bent on creating another Holocaust.

An assertion which has been ripped to shreds here numerous times.

The idea of oil bribery affecting the UNSC is nonsense, as were that the case, Israel would have been hammered from the get-go. You refuse to acknowledge the German point because it highlights the hypocrisy with regards Palistinians. If there can be an Israeli state, then there can be a Palistinean state.

Are you seriously that ignorant?!?!? Israel was hammered from the get go. Just 1 hour after Ben Gurion declared Independence on May 14, 1948, Arab armies invaded Israel. They just didn't expect that 600,000 weakened Holocaust survivors would kick their fucking asses back across the Jordan.

I did acknowledge the German point. You just don't have the knowledge of history to realize that Germany ended up they way they did because of the Cold War. Letting Germany remain meant we had a buffer between NATO and the Soviets.

Are you seriously that ignorant?!?!? Israel was hammered from the get go. Just 1 hour after Ben Gurion declared Independence on May 14, 1948, Arab armies invaded Israel. They just didn't expect that 600,000 weakened Holocaust survivors would kick their fucking asses back across the Jordan..

...by the UNSC? Try reading before ranting.


I did acknowledge the German point. You just don't have the knowledge of history to realize that Germany ended up they way they did because of the Cold War. Letting Germany remain meant we had a buffer between NATO and the Soviets.

They were let remain. They werent divided into two smaller states. They werent dissolved as a nation. Yet the Palistineans aren't deserving of a state?

An assertion which has been ripped to shreds here numerous times.

Now you're really looking like a fool.

There are 50 million Arabs. What does it matter if we lose 10 million to kill all of the Jews? The price is worth it.

Now you're really looking like a fool.

I'm sorry, I didn't know that ibn Saud was the entire population of Palestine.
http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12155802&postcount=83

I'm sorry, I didn't know that ibn Saud was the entire population of Palestine.

No, but he was the leader of one of the states invading Israel and thus his words prove that the intent of the 1948 War was to kill all of the Jews and finish the Holocaust.

No, but he was the leader of one of the states invading Israel and thus his words prove that the intent of the 1948 War was to kill all of the Jews and finish the Holocaust.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12155802&postcount=83

It's not Israel's fault that the Palestinians were hell bent on creating another Holocaust.

Now you're really looking like a fool.

You're the one who's just argued for a state to prevent 'cultural assimilation' yet denies the usual right of self determination to Arabs.

You just showed your lack of knowledge on the land. Israel is NOT a desert. I just got back from there and can show you pictures of how beautiful the land is. It is more like Northern California.
Good. Obviously I was using hyperbole.
Israel and the Jews shouldn't be forced to be put in the diaspara again because a bunch of Arabs are intolerant of another group living in the Middle East.
Sometimes I wonder if you people (and by “you people” I don’t mean anything racist, I’m referring to warmongers, not Jews) ever stop to consider that you’re enemies are human beings. Do you ever ask yourself why they’re intolerant? Do you ever think that maybe they’re not evil, but they’re just like you and me and are upset about what they feel was a wrong done against them by the West? Maybe, just maybe they didn’t appreciate the land they’d lived on for hundreds of years suddenly falling under the jurisdiction of foreigners? Of course not. They are animals, meant only for the slaughter of brave Israeli and (if you had your way) American troops.

Let me tell you something. The bulk of my ancestors came from Southern Scotland, much more recently than yours came from Israel, but I will never return there with a bunch Northern Irishman and Scots-Irish Americans and claim it as ours. Your people are not special.

You're the one who's just argued for a state to prevent 'cultural assimilation' yet denies the usual right of self determination to Arabs.

I've been supportive of a 2 state solution. The Arabs just aren't going to get all of their demands. That's the price for walking away from the Peel Reccomendations, the 47 Plan, making war with Israel numerous times, and the 2000 rejection of the Camp David Talks.

Sometimes I wonder if you people (and by “you people” I don’t mean anything racist, I’m referring to warmongers, not Jews) ever stop to consider that you’re enemies are human beings. Do you ever ask yourself why they’re intolerant? Do you ever think that maybe they’re not evil, but they’re just like you and me and are upset about what they feel was a wrong done against them by the West? Maybe, just maybe they didn’t appreciate the land they’d lived on for hundreds of years suddenly falling under the jurisdiction of foreigners? Of course not. They are animals, meant only for the slaughter of brave Israeli and (if you had your way) American troops.

Let me tell you something. The bulk of my ancestors came from Southern Scotland, much more recently than yours came from Israel, but I will never return there with a bunch Northern Irishman and Scots-Irish Americans and claim it as ours. Your people are not special.Way to try to dodge any true debate by trying to brand me a racist. I have said numerous times I would be in favor of giving the Palestinians a state. They just won't get all of their demands because they have to be shown there is a price for their actions over the years.

You also show a lack of historical knowledge. Being under Israeli control wasn't throwing them under foreign jurisdiction. It was the most local they had ever had. It was an improvement of being under Istanbul or London's control (which they were under for centuries). It isn't Israel's fault that the religious leaders filled the people with so much hatred that when the Israelis took over, they bought the lies and blood libel they had been told and fled for their lives because they believed the Jews would kill them and drink their blood.

Way to try to dodge any true debate by trying to brand me a racist.

You fail from this point on.

NOWHERE were you branded a racist. Warmonger? Yes. Racist? No.

Way to try to dodge any true debate by trying to brand me a racist. I have said numerous times I would be in favor of giving the Palestinians a state. They just won't get all of their demands because they have to be shown there is a price for their actions over the years.
Nowhere did I say you were a racist. I merely said you lack compassion for your enemies and do not even attempt to understand them. This doesn’t show racism, but an entirely different kind of backward attitude prevalent in those you choose to hate, a lack of respect for human life.
You also show a lack of historical knowledge. Being under Israeli control wasn't throwing them under foreign jurisdiction. It was the most local they had ever had. It was an improvement of being under Istanbul or London's control (which they were under for centuries). It isn't Israel's fault that the religious leaders filled the people with so much hatred that when the Israelis took over, they bought the lies and blood libel they had been told and fled for their lives because they believed the Jews would kill them and drink their blood.
I am well aware of the former rulers of the region. I am also aware that under the Ottomans the area experienced some of its most tolerant moments. In fact, it was one of the most tolerant places in the world. What happened? It’s easy for me to understand, but obviously it isn’t for someone such as you.

Perhaps…
What would your reaction be if, all of a sudden, large groups of Chinamen were given control of Chicago by the US government and the government of Illinois? After all, it’s their right to do such with the lands they govern, according to you anyway.

So, now to defend Israel's right to exist and to basically disagree with your anti-Israel stance I must be anti-American, okay, if you say so.... :rolleyes:
Yay! W00t! I'm suddenly anti-Israel! :rolleyes:
I have no idea how it came to this though, as all I did was to point out that when you blame the UN and the UN security council, you are, in fact, blaming the US.

That's why I asked what I did. You blame the US for picking on Israel. Why?

And why do you feel you have to run to the position of proclaiming me anti-Israel instead of coming up with proper arguments?

Because that’s what Jesus would want.

Wait, why does Israel care what Jesus wants?

Maybe, just maybe they didn’t appreciate the land they’d lived on for hundreds of years suddenly falling under the jurisdiction of foreigners? Of course not. They are animals, meant only for the slaughter of brave Israeli and (if you had your way) American troops.


Jews have also lived there for hundurds of years. An appell to history will only tell you what an appell to politcs will also tell you. That there are two peoples here who have claim to this land, and thus two states are needed. That is what the investigators said in the 30's and that is what the 1948 partition came up with. The Arabs however were intransigent. They were not living at the time, in majoritive numbers in the area designated to be Israel. Had they not attacked Israel for mere provocation of its existance, they would have far more land now than they ever will get now. But a series of wars later has put the Palestians in a worse position than when they started. The Palestian extremists continue to use viloence to achieve their aims, when all it has brought for them in the past is less and less land. Rejecting settlement after settlement means they will get less and less land. They need to do what the Israelies have done with the cease fire. Put their guns down, talk and do not pick the guns up if what is said does not meat your exact needs. Negotiate untill you have an agreement each side is equally unhappy with. Sounds negative but that is what a compromise is.

Jews have (......)h side is equally unhappy with. Sounds negative but that is what a compromise is.

The land is not Israels to give. There is a state of Israel and thats not what we generally discuss. This is land outside of Israel.

that when the Israelis took over, they bought the lies and blood libel they had been told and fled for their lives because they believed the Jews would kill them and drink their blood.

Nonsense. They fled from the Hagganah and Irgun because they were taking people out and shooting them, or because those organisations systematically cleared the areas. We've been through this before.

The land is not Israels to give. There is a state of Israel and thats not what we generally discuss. This is land outside of Israel.

But Israel has a vital security interest there, as has been demonstrated by the Gaza withdraw. Israel pulls out, rockets are continued to be fired into Israel. Israel will withdraw when they have an asurance that the viloence against them will stop. Currently the Palestians are proving Israel's case for them. Give them an inch and they will take a yard. Israel withdraws from Gaza and rockets continue flying. So Israel and the Palestians agree a cease fire, rockets keep flying. Firing rockets into civilian areas with the intention to kill civilians is not legimate warfare conduct.

Correct. The good news is that he is a "troll". The bad news is that millions do actually think as he pretends to.

Oh so now, if you belief in Christianity you must be a Troll....:rolleyes:

Whether you believe me or not, I reassure you that I am definately not pretending.

[QUOTE=Neo Sanderstead;12152121]To anyone who would normally be critical of Israel in a debate and supportive of the Palestians in a discussion on the subject, I would ask you please to defend the continued violation of the cease fire.

<snip>

For perspective
in 2006
Palestinians killed by Israelis 660
Israelis killed by Palestinians 25

The IDF as the military arm of the Israeli government is under the command
and control of the Israeli government.

The guys firing Qassam rockets into Israel are various and due to the
way in which groups opposed to Israeli occupation are structured
are not under control of the Palestinian government.
Meanwhile Palestine remains under occupation which means that ease of
travel for Palestinian security forces within Palestine is restricted which
means they are unable to properly police Palestine.

And as people have pointed out, the cause of attacks,
heavy handed occupation, checkpoints, curfews and theft remain
active bringing every new generation continued reason to try to harm
Israel.

-snip-
as all I did was to point out that when you blame the UN and the UN security council, you are, in fact, blaming the US.

This is far from the the facts. Yes, the USA did the largest part in making the UN exist, however, with it being its own organization they need to take accountablity for their own actions. You really should get off of that "blame America first" bandwagon.

That's why I asked what I did. You blame the US for picking on Israel. Why?

Wrong, yet again. I have never blamed the US for picking on Israel. I have no idea where you got that bogus info from. If the USA didn't back up Israel, Israel would have nobody.

And why do you feel you have to run to the position of proclaiming me anti-Israel instead of coming up with proper arguments?

I could argue, "why do you feel you have to run to the position of proclaiming me" anti-American "instead of coming up with proper arguements?"

For perspective
in 2006
Palestinians killed by Israelis 660
Israelis killed by Palestinians 25

The IDF as the military arm of the Israeli government is under the command
and control of the Israeli government.

The guys firing Qassam rockets into Israel are various and due to the
way in which groups opposed to Israeli occupation are structured
are not under control of the Palestinian government.
Meanwhile Palestine remains under occupation which means that ease of
travel for Palestinian security forces within Palestine is restricted which
means they are unable to properly police Palestine.

And as people have pointed out, the cause of attacks,
heavy handed occupation, checkpoints, curfews and theft remain
active bringing every new generation continued reason to try to harm
Israel.

and this is exactly why their governments need to step in and get control over their out of control people.....unlikely to happen since now a known terrorist group has been put in place to govern.

For perspective
in 2006
Palestinians killed by Israelis 660
Israelis killed by Palestinians 25

I'd like to see your source

The main reason for that though is more to do with the advanced nature of Isralie hospitals and the refusal of the PA to accept help when offered by the same, firecely non-political hospitals


The guys firing Qassam rockets into Israel are various and due to the
way in which groups opposed to Israeli occupation are structured
are not under control of the Palestinian government.
Meanwhile Palestine remains under occupation which means that ease of
travel for Palestinian security forces within Palestine is restricted which
means they are unable to properly police Palestine.

Erm, the rockets are comming from Gaza, where the Isralies have pulled out from. Your argument is flawed.


And as people have pointed out, the cause of attacks,
heavy handed occupation, checkpoints, curfews and theft remain
active bringing every new generation continued reason to try to harm
Israel.

Firstly, the attacks are from Gaza, so no they dont have reason as Israel has pulled out of there

Secondly, they are attacking Isralie civilians. Yes, they may have reason to attack the IDF or the Isarelie government but civilians are not fair game. They have nothing to do with the conflict, and they may also oppose what the Isralie government are doing. It is wrong to intentionally kill civilians, which is what the palestian terrorists are trying to do.

This is far from the the facts. Yes, the USA did the largest part in making the UN exist, however, with it being its own organization they need to take accountablity for their own actions. You really should get off of that "blame America first" bandwagon.
I'm not the one blaming america here. Though you seem to forget that the US is perhaps the most influential member of the UN, and one of the five veto powers on the Security council. If the UN fails, then surely the permanent members carry part of the blame.

Wrong, yet again. I have never blamed the US for picking on Israel. I have no idea where you got that bogus info from. If the USA didn't back up Israel, Israel would have nobody.

Yet you did this:
I agree.

I'm not sure why Israel bothers even to deal with the UN. As I see the UN they seem to back the Palestinians more so than Israel. It's absurd. The UN isn't going to do anything to stop the Palestinians. Ohh, you're right! Why is the international community always picking on the occupying power? Surely it's got nothing to do with the UN resolutions they refuse to comply with - and the continued breach of international law, well, that's just not the business of the UN is it.

Damn you UN! Especially the member states of the Security Council, every one of them always picking on poor Israel!

:rolleyes:sounds pretty accurate to me.
So you think it sounds accurate that every member of the security council is picking on Israel, well then you claim that the US is picking on Israel aren't you.

I could argue, "why do you feel you have to run to the position of proclaiming me" anti-American "instead of coming up with proper arguements?"
Because I like pulling your pants down and showing how your arguements lack merit.

I'd like to see your source
I can help with that:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6215769.stm


The main reason for that though is more to do with the advanced nature of Isralie hospitals and the refusal of the PA to accept help when offered by the same, firecely non-political hospitals
I'd like to see your source.

Nonsense. They fled from the Hagganah and Irgun because they were taking people out and shooting them, or because those organisations systematically cleared the areas. We've been through this before.
The Irgun did that in 1 or 2 cases, but that was all. The Irgun was then cut off by the new Israeli government after those events. The Haganah did NOT do that.

After all, hundreds of thousands of Arabs did stay and enjoy more rights in Israel than they would have in Saudi Arabia.

I'm not the one blaming america here. Though you seem to forget that the US is perhaps the most influential member of the UN, and one of the five veto powers on the Security council. If the UN fails, then surely the permanent members carry part of the blame.

I'm convinced that the USA is losing their influence within the UN. Ever so increasingly does the UN amusingly undermines the USA.

Yet you did this:

So you think it sounds accurate that every member of the security council is picking on Israel, well then you claim that the US is picking on Israel aren't you. .

Heaven forbid that I would misspeak or type in this case... :rolleyes:

Because I like pulling your pants down and showing how your arguements lack merit.

-snip-

I still stand by my statements of the UN being a failed organization and yes the USA is partially to blame. We should have never help create them.

But Israel has a vital security interest there,.

I think I speak for many when I go "Awwwwww". Poor little nuclear armed country needs to throw Arabs out for "vital security interest". My ass.

Why, by the way, would you place civillian housing, in such an area?


as has been demonstrated by the Gaza withdraw. Israel pulls out, rockets are continued to be fired into Israel. Israel will withdraw when they have an asurance that the viloence against them will stop.,.

Like Oslo, where it did stop for a time, and lo and behold the building accelerated by 5 times its previous rate.


I'd like to see your source
.,.

You were given it already in another thread, however -
http://www.btselem.org/English/ is the originator of the report


The main reason for that though is more to do with the advanced nature of Isralie hospitals and the refusal of the PA to accept help when offered by the same, firecely non-political hospitals.,.

Source please. I've asked for a source for this numerous times. Not because I havent looked, but because I have looked and not found. Hence my suspicion.


The Haganah did NOT do that..,.

Heres one, and yes, theres more -

"Great Suffering was inflicted upon the men taking part in the eviction action. [They] included youth-movement graduates who had been inculcated with values such as international brotherhood and humaneness. The eviction action went beyond the concepts they were used to. There were some fellows who refused to take part. . . Prolonged propaganda activities were required after the action . . . to explain why we were obliged to undertake such a harsh and cruel action." (Yitzak Rabin, speaking of the expulsion of the population of Al-lydd/Lydda and al-Ramla) Out of 17,000 in al-Ramla, 400 Arabs were left, and about 1,000 out of 19,000 in Lydda.

If you want more, ask.

"Great Suffering was inflicted upon the men taking part in the eviction action. [They] included youth-movement graduates who had been inculcated with values such as international brotherhood and humaneness. The eviction action went beyond the concepts they were used to. There were some fellows who refused to take part. . . Prolonged propaganda activities were required after the action . . . to explain why we were obliged to undertake such a harsh and cruel action." (Yitzak Rabin, speaking of the expulsion of the population of Al-lydd/Lydda and al-Ramla) Out of 17,000 in al-Ramla, 400 Arabs were left, and about 1,000 out of 19,000 in Lydda.

If you want more, ask.
There were some cases, but I want you to account for all of the refugees who were created by the war. I guarantee most of those were people who left to clear the path for the armies. This just covers a small percentage of them.

Oh, and how about the nearly 1 million Jewish refugees from the war? Do they not matter?

There were some cases, but I want you to account for all of the refugees who were created by the war. I guarantee most of those were people who left to clear the path for the armies. This just covers a small percentage of them.

Oh, and how about the nearly 1 million Jewish refugees from the war? Do they not matter?

The majority of Arabs were expelled, that Jewish people were expelled over the next 20 years is not contested, nor denied. I suggest you read Benny Morris" History of the Palestine refugee problem".

"we adopt the system of aggressive defense; with every Arab attack we must respond with a decisive blow: the destruction of the place or the expulsion of the residents along with the seizure of the place." (Ben Gurion to the Hagganah, December 19th 1947)

"the ... transfer of the [Palestinian] Arabs out of the country in my eyes is one of the most just, moral, and correct that can be done. I have thought of this for many years." (Shlomo Lavi, July 24th 1948)

This, despite more sane voices -
""We are embarking on a course that will most greatly endanger any hope of peaceful alliance with forces who could be our allies in the Middle East .... Hundreds of thousands of [Palestinian] Arabs who will be evicted from Palestine, even if they are to blame, and left hanging in the midair, will grow to hate us. If you do things in the heat of the war, in the midst of the battle, it's one thing. But if after a month, you do it in cold blood, for political reason, in public, that is something altogether different."
(Aharon Chizling, 16th July 1948)


"Many of us are LOSING their [human] image . . How easily they speak of how it is possible and permissible to take women, children, and old men and to fill the road with them because such is the imperative of strategy. And this we say, the members of Hashomer Hatzair, who remember who used this means against our people during the Second World] war. . . . I am appalled." (Meir Ya'iri ibid benny Morris)

I think I speak for many when I go "Awwwwww". Poor little nuclear armed country needs to throw Arabs out for "vital security interest". My ass.

Why, by the way, would you place civillian housing, in such an area?

1. Don't talk about nuclear armerment to make Israel seem like a bully. The Palestians know that Israel cannot use its nuclear weapons against them, so that has little relevence

2. The vital security intrest is that of the Isralie populus. The Palestians have demonstrated, with the Gaza withdrawl and the response, that when the Isralies leave they continue their vilonce and it gets worse. Ergo the Isralies need hold of certian areas that the Palestians use to attack them with. Of course, if the Palestians stop attacking them, then they will withdraw (as they demonstrated in the 2000 acords which would have ment large scale settlement deconstruction had they gone ahead)


Source please. I've asked for a source for this numerous times. Not because I havent looked, but because I have looked and not found. Hence my suspicion.


I've told you about this already. If you look in "case for peace" you will see it. I dont have the copy to hand so I can't give you the precise refence infomation that they use

1. Don't talk about nuclear armerment to make Israel seem like a bully. The Palestians know that Israel cannot use its nuclear weapons against them, so that has little relevence


Ok then. Poor first world level military power. Because they dont have a problem using most of their hardware when it suits them.


2. The vital security intrest is that of the Isralie populus. The Palestians have demonstrated, with the Gaza withdrawl and the response, that when the Isralies leave they continue their vilonce and it gets worse. Ergo the Isralies need hold of certian areas that the Palestians use to attack them with. Of course, if the Palestians stop attacking them, then they will withdraw (as they demonstrated in the 2000 acords which would have ment large scale settlement deconstruction had they gone ahead)


Allow me to clarify. If they seize land and place Israeli civillians at the edge of this in colonies for 'peace' of course, then extend the Israeli border around them - again for 'peace', who is going to be very angry on the other side of the border? Think. Real hard.


I've told you about this already. If you look in "case for peace" you will see it. I dont have the copy to hand so I can't give you the precise refence infomation that they use

But why is there no Israeli govenment release? I can find the exact order they issued in 1967 re the Geneva convention, for fucks sake. Why is it not writ in letters large on every anti-Palestinian site? "Theyd rather die than go to an Israeli hospital". But I can't find it. And I'm made even more suspicious by the author of that book, because hes been caught out before.

:rolleyes:
I'm convinced that the USA is losing their influence within the UN. Ever so increasingly does the UN amusingly undermines the USA.
Aha? As the current administration clearly is trying to undermine the UN by trying to make it "irrelevant" and by appointing mr. Bolton as ambassador to the UN - but please explain how exactly you believe the UN is trying to undermine the US?

Heaven forbid that I would misspeak or type in this case... :rolleyes:
Ah, so did you misspeak when you claimed that I was somehow "anti-Israel" when I pointed it out the first time, or when you claimed that I was on the "blame America first bandwagon" when I kept pointing it out for the second time?

Sorry, I don't buy that. Either you have a seriously bad habit of misspeaking repeatedly, or you don't read the posts you're responding to or have no idea what you're talking about. I rather believe the latter. Though of course, it could also be all of the above.

I still stand by my statements of the UN being a failed organization and yes the USA is partially to blame. We should have never help create them.
Yeah, well, I'll end the thread hijack here.

We're done.

I say it's time Israel take their restraints off and go head on and in Full Force vs the Hamas led Palestine Authority.
Ah yes, I knew we could count on you for the token 'macho' proposal.

Isn't it ironic that out of nearly 200 nations that are in the world today, and of the many thousands of nations that have found a name in history's great roll call, that the one particular nation that God did set aside for his name, has also been the nation that has been the most despised and persecuted.

Did God tell the Israelis to do all the things that they do? I don't think so.

That there are two peoples here who have claim to this land, and thus two states are needed.
Plenty of nations live peacefully with more than one peoples. Mine for instance.

EDIT: Also, I still await a reply from that always charming poster, IDF.

... That there are two peoples here who have claim to this land, and thus two states are needed. That is what the investigators said in the 30's and that is what the 1948 partition came up with. ...


Two peoples with a claim to one land would make most people think
1 consensus driven democratic state was needed


Israels wish to be a jewish state is understandable due to the history
of persecution.
But is there any other state in the world that would not be
reviled for attempting to have such a sectarian(for want of a better word) state. And worse, attempts to claim democratic legitimacy for a state
based on race/religion whose every action including the pullback from
Gaza is to do with keeping their "majority"

However the withdrawal from Gaza whilst keeping control of borders
and airspace and allowing yourself the right to send your tanks and
troops in anytime you like is less a withdrawal then change of use
from Israeli settlements and lots of little Gazan prison districts
to one complete Gaza prison district.