NationStates Jolt Archive

"The Israeli authorities are planning to build three new Jewish neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem, an area regarded as occupied land under international law.

The plan, which has yet to receive final approval, would involve building about 20,000 homes. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6645777.stm


Though far less spectacular than bombings, air-strikes and the like, its with this that the real and lasting gains are made by the occupiers. And due to its less spectacular nature, it isnt seen as the context when the inevitable violent backlash occurs.

"The Israeli authorities are planning to build three new Jewish neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem, an area regarded as occupied land under international law.

The plan, which has yet to receive final approval, would involve building about 20,000 homes. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6645777.stm


Though far less spectacular than bombings, air-strikes and the like, its with this that the real and lasting gains are made by the occupiers. And due to its less spectacular nature, it isnt seen as the context when the inevitable violent backlash occurs.

So what?

So what?

Thank you for sharing your ignorance. Though I do know theoretically there are many such people in the world, it does no harm to be confronted with the grim reality on occassion.

The Palestinian chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, said the plan destroyed efforts to re-start the peace process.

He said Israel had to choose between settlements or peace, but could not have both.

That sucks.

Another major stride forward for peace in the Middle East. Not.

"The Israeli authorities are planning to build three new Jewish neighbourhoods in East Jerusalem, an area regarded as occupied land under international law.

The plan, which has yet to receive final approval, would involve building about 20,000 homes. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6645777.stm


Though far less spectacular than bombings, air-strikes and the like, its with this that the real and lasting gains are made by the occupiers. And due to its less spectacular nature, it isnt seen as the context when the inevitable violent backlash occurs.


It's what they want. The constant cycle of fear, loathing and violence is what keeps those that govern in power. Business as usual. No amount of whining on our part will matter. There will never be peace there until the citizens realize that their lives are merely political cannon fodder. *shrug* I'm fresh out of sympathy.

It's what they want. The constant cycle of fear, loathing and violence is what keeps those that govern in power. Business as usual. No amount of whining on our part will matter. There will never be peace there until the citizens realize that their lives are merely political cannon fodder. *shrug* I'm fresh out of sympathy.

Maybe if that whining was the sound of scramjet engines carrying cruise missiles, they'd listen more often.

Maybe if Israel was recognized by more than two arab nations they'd be more willing to negotiate.

Maybe if Israel was recognized by more than two arab nations they'd be more willing to negotiate.

You see, that might be the case if it was fighting and bombing raids you were talking about...but its hard to see how you can link building 20,000 civillian homes in an area thats not yours, against the inhabitants will, with the lack of diplomatic relations with some other bunch.

Still, we don't want Arabs to colonise Israel and create an Islamic state, right?

Does this Arab insistance that their territories must be completely free of Jews disturb anyone else?

And does anyone else not think that if the Arabs can't tolerate the presence of Jews, they're not going to be geniune about peace?

Does this Arab insistance that their territories must be completely free of Jews disturb anyone else?

And does anyone else not think that if the Arabs can't tolerate the presence of Jews, they're not going to be geniune about peace?

Yes, their insistence on controlling their own territory is extremely anti-social. Didn't they learn to share in kindergarten? :rolleyes:

Does this Arab insistance that their territories must be completely free of Jews disturb anyone else?

And does anyone else not think that if the Arabs can't tolerate the presence of Jews, they're not going to be geniune about peace?
So, you think any country has the right, through force, to occupy another state or territory, and then colonise it? Would you not object if it were your country, whichever it may be, being used for this purpose?

Israel proves once again it's not interested in peace.

hmm... the number should be three, not two., as Mauritania has relations with them.

But the point is, as far back as 1967 arab leaders agreed that there would be no peace, negotiations or acceptance of Israel. Seeing as Israel took the west bank form Jordan in the six-day war, they should be happoy Israel's giving back over 90% of it!

In all honesty, if I had the power to cram peace down their throats I'd give East Jerusalem to Israel, the Gaza Strip, and the rest of the West Bank to Palestine, and force both sides to offer "displaced" people on their side dual citizenship in Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately, I don't have that sort of power, and I imagine both sides are too stubborn to accept a fair division.

Israel proves once again it's not interested in peace.I have always said that Israel has not been interested in peace from the very beginning. And we know what Israel did when one of their PMs attempted small steps towards peace.

Maybe if Israel was recognized by more than two arab nations they'd be more willing to negotiate.Maybe if Israel stopped its occupation and settlement expansion, it would be recognized by more Arab states. And iirr just lately an Arab summit made a step forward towards accepting Israel (under certain circumstances, of course).

Still, we don't want Arabs to colonise Israel and create an Islamic state, right?Why don't we?

Well, I (personally) want Israel to completely annex the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan, and let the Arab refugees return and then make all these Arabs Israeli citizens. One state, and all will be fine.

Why don't we?
When I said Islamic I meant as in a theocratic state.

Well, I (personally) want Israel to completely annex the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan, and let the Arab refugees return and then make all these Arabs Israeli citizens. One state, and all will be fine.
Well, if there were constitutional protections for all faiths, ethnicities and such, and both sides agree to it, I wouldn't disagree. But, in the current situation, I think that that wouldn't be likely to work and be accepted either by Arabs or Jews.

Yes, their insistence on controlling their own territory is extremely anti-social. Didn't they learn to share in kindergarten?

So, you think that if a government doesnlt like people of a certain race/religion, that government has the right to expel them, and kill any who remain?

Ethnic cleansing is slightly anti-social, even if it is cleanising Jews.

The Palestinian chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, said the plan destroyed efforts to re-start the peace process.

He said Israel had to choose between settlements or peace, but could not have both.

I thought the efforts to restart the peace process had been destroyed when Hamas made it clear that they intended to continue fighting until they controlled all of Israel and Palestine.

Why don't we?

Well, I (personally) want Israel to completely annex the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan, and let the Arab refugees return and then make all these Arabs Israeli citizens. One state, and all will be fine.

The majority of both Israelis and Palestinians oppose that 'solution' because, unlike you, they realise that it'd lead to instant civil war and everyone would be back where they started, albeit with a few thousand more dead civilians.

So, you think that if a government doesnlt like people of a certain race/religion, that government has the right to expel them....No.. I am against mass deportations.
I say lets give them temporary work permits..

I thought the efforts to restart the peace process had been destroyed when Hamas made it clear that they intended to continue fighting until they controlled all of Israel and Palestine.

Well Saeb Erekat isn't a member of Hamas. Since both parties agreed to both go into a unity government it was felt the process had been gotten back on track.

Well Saeb Erekat isn't a member of Hamas. Since both parties agreed to both go into a unity government it was felt the process had been gotten back on track.

I don't think it was ever realistic to expect the peace process to continue, despite the work of good men like Saeb Erekat. Even if Hamas did decide to back down on their demands for all the land, this would result in the Islamic fundamentalists of the movement breaking off and forming a new terrorist group, and then negotiations would break down again.

To be honest I don't expect to see peace in the Middle East in my lifetime unless somebody loses it completely and pushes the big red button.

I don't think it was ever realistic to expect the peace process to continue, despite the work of good men like Saeb Erekat. Even if Hamas did decide to back down on their demands for all the land, this would result in the Islamic fundamentalists of the movement breaking off and forming a new terrorist group, and then negotiations would break down again.

... in other words, "the usual shit".

To be honest I don't expect to see peace in the Middle East in my lifetime unless somebody loses it completely and pushes the big red button.
I'd normally have said yes to that, but after seeing Ian Paisley, Martin McGuinness, Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern shake hands and have a laugh..... anything's possible.

... in other words, "the usual shit".

Pretty much, yeah. :(

I'd normally have said yes to that, but after seeing Ian Paisley, Martin McGuinness, Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern shake hands and have a laugh..... anything's possible.

I think the Israel-Palestine conflict is even more polarised than Northern Ireland (if that's even possible) but I don't know that much about it so I'm not going to show off my ignorance. I guess there's always a small chance of peace; we can but hope.

So, you think that if a government doesnlt like people of a certain race/religion, that government has the right to expel them, and kill any who remain?

Ethnic cleansing is slightly anti-social, even if it is cleanising Jews.

Do you even know what this is about? This is not about some Jes trying to move into Palestine and teh governmetn not allowing it, or kicking them out, or killing htem. This is about the Israeli government building civilian houses in a settlement, at the expense of the palestinians, who may be evicted from their homes, as has occured in previous settlements, in occupied Palestinian land.

I'd normally have said yes to that, but after seeing Ian Paisley, Martin McGuinness, Tony Blair and Bertie Ahern shake hands and have a laugh..... anything's possible.But in the Palestine-Israel situation the hand-shaking phase has been in the 90s and then was violently ended by a Jewish moron killing Rabin and the Israeli people electing Netanyahu in response.

This Is Old News ('http://www.theonion.com/content/news/middle_east_conflict_intensifies')

So, you think that if a government doesnlt like people of a certain race/religion, that government has the right to expel them, and kill any who remain?
Do you even know what we're talking about here? It's not Jews being kicked out of the Palestinian territories, it's about people coming in and colonising it.

Well... damn. Israel did say she'd draw up borders unilaterally if Palestine won't play ball, but I guess we should have seen something like this coming. There will never be Peace in the Middle East at this rate.

More reason why religion and politics should never be allowed to mix.

More reason why religion and politics should never be allowed to mix.

We send you to the Middle East then, to talk them into doing that.

If you're kidnapped while in Gaza, it was nice knowing you.

We send you to the Middle East then, to talk them into doing that.

If you're kidnapped while in Gaza, it was nice knowing you.

Strangely enough Westerners kidnapped in Gaza generally come back in one piece in a short time. The current missing BBC man is an exception, hes being held by a criminal gang trying to extort weaponry.

What is likely to kill him in Gaza or the West Bank is the IDF, statistically speaking. Working for the UN is the most dangerous, followed by NGO and then Journalist. Unless he looks like a Palestinian...then hes really in trouble.

We send you to the Middle East then, to talk them into doing that.

If you're kidnapped while in Gaza, it was nice knowing you.

And where did I say that anyone should tell them that Kimchi? Even if someone had the idea to tell a bunch of zealots on both sides, it's a lot more positive-minded approach than your Sterilize the Muslims proposal.

And where did I say that anyone should tell them that Kimchi? Even if someone had the idea to tell a bunch of zealots on both sides, it's a lot more positive-minded approach than your Sterilize the Muslims proposal.

Why did you mention it if you know that your idea has zero chance of working?

Why did you mention it if you know that your idea has zero chance of working?

Because in your excitement to read between the lines, you missed out on how it was phrased. As an observation, not a proposal.

So, you think any country has the right, through force, to occupy another state or territory, and then colonise it? Would you not object if it were your country, whichever it may be, being used for this purpose?

Isn't that what England, France, and Spain did? If it wasn't for their imperialistic nature most the free world would not exist.

Now, that does not mean I condone such acts however, it may be considered occupied land by the Palestinians, and many other nations, however, Isreal sees Jeruselum as sacred land and therefore theirs to utlize as they see fit. The Palestinians also see this a holy ground, and insist that they must occupy it. Now why can't both side agree that it is holy land, and treat it as such. And sharing isn't such a bad idea.

Personally, I have come to the opinion that many Arab nations, and a majority of Palestinians, have no desire for peace with Isreal. Honestly, if the people really wanted peace they woun't have put Hamas in power.

The Isrealis aren't any less to blame for the problems either. I mean just because someone fired a gun, and injured an officer in your military isn't a reason to send in thirty tanks and destroy hundred of homes. Just because a couple of soldiers are kidnapped isn't a reason to send your entire military to attack a neighboring country. This eye for an eye attitude only escalates the problem.

The reality is, if either side really wants peace they need to start looking for it, and stop trying to find reasons to fight.

Personally, I have come to the opinion that many Arab nations, and a majority of Palestinians, have no desire for peace with Isreal. Honestly, if the people really wanted peace they woun't have put Hamas in power.

Uhhh... no. The Palestinian people were fucked either way. Hamas was not elected on a "Throw the Jews Down the Well" campaign. They were elected on the promise of cleaning up government.

You see? The Palestinians only have a choice between the Jihadist Fruitcakes in Hamas, and the Fucking Corrupt Fatcats of Fatah who were lining their pockets at the expense of the Palestinian people.

Choosing between shit and shinola is not a real choice. You're just wanting to pick out which dark sticky stuff smells better.

"Throw the Jews down the well" is a bipartisan policy for the Palestinians, but his overall point is right, Hamas are rabid Jew-haters, dedicated to their destruction. Anyone electing Hamas would understand that. Its just that the Palestinians think that a little less corruption of other countrie's taxpayers money is worth a little to them.

The Gaza pullout and its aftermath has proven that areas occupied by Israel are a whole lot safer than areas they pull out of.

The Gaza pullout and its aftermath has proven that areas occupied by Israel are a whole lot safer than areas they pull out of.

Safer for who? 'Theres an occupation, this leads to violence, therefore the occupation is justified, because theres violence.'

And its not watchtowers, military bases or defences they're building - its domestic houses. Its colonisation any way you slice it.

Safer for who? 'Theres an occupation, this leads to violence, therefore the occupation is justified, because theres violence.'

And its not watchtowers, military bases or defences they're building - its domestic houses. Its colonisation any way you slice it.

Sounds like IDF is saying "Those damn dirty Muslims ought to be grateful Israel is occupying them," donnit?

What is likely to kill him in Gaza or the West Bank is the IDF, statistically speaking. Working for the UN is the most dangerous, followed by NGO and then Journalist. Unless he looks like a Palestinian...then hes really in trouble.

So you're telling me that the IDF is a bunch of brutes who kill indiscriminately anybody who is different?

Like terrorists? Like the Palestinians and Hamas, bomb and kill indescriminately.

As for the settlements in East Jerusalem, bad idea it's another target with the potential to become just easy pickings for terrorists. I mean that's why Israel got out of Gaza right? However this is still only planned and the left will probably reject it so it might get through.

And East Jerusalem is not occupied it was won in a legal war just like how the US won California.

Finally let me link to a post in another thread I made on this topic that sums this whole conflict:

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12631182&postcount=82http://

The second paragraph is the pertanent part.

that sucks...

Personally, I have come to the opinion that many Arab nations, and a majority of Palestinians, have no desire for peace with Isreal. Honestly, if the people really wanted peace they woun't have put Hamas in power.

Actually the majority of Palestinians favour a two-state solution, as do the majority of Israelis.

So you're telling me that the IDF is a bunch of brutes who kill indiscriminately anybody who is different?

Like terrorists? Like the Palestinians and Hamas, bomb and kill indescriminately.

No, he's saying that more westerners in the occupied territories are killed by the IDF, rather than Hamas or whoever. I thought that was pretty obvious.

So you're telling me that the IDF is a bunch of brutes who kill indiscriminately anybody who is different?.

No, anybody they or their political masters want out of the way. They also kill to 'send a message' and to instill fear in the local populace. Its a practice as old as colonialism. At least 14 UN Personnell alone were killed in Gaza in the last 5-6 years by the IDF.



And East Jerusalem is not occupied it was won in a legal war just like how the US won California.

It is indeed occupied, and is regarded as such by the international community, as mentioned in the OP. The days of 'mug thy neighbour' are long gone.


Also most Israeli settlements are/were in land that was desert or not inhabited before they got there. My cousins live in a settlement and before that settlement was built the land was nothing but useless desert. Nobody was living there so in them building they have helped everybody both Palestinians and Israelis.


'helped'.....Hmmmmm

Apart from the 'dodginess' of land bought at the point of a gun, by the citizens of an alien armed occupying force, at least 40% of settlements are built on land taken outright from Palestinians.

More than a third of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank are built on privately owned Palestinian land, an Israeli campaign group has reported.
Peace Now says nearly 40% of the land the settlements sit on is, according to official data, "effectively stolen" from Palestinian landowners.
This, the group says, is a violation of Israel's own laws.
Settlements in the occupied West Bank are illegal under international law, although Israel rejects this. (my bold)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6168752.stm

Please never help me like that.


Egypt won't accept Gaza back and Jordan doesn't want the West Bank back despite Israel's asking in both of their peace treaties. So it's not 100% Israel's fault. Though I will place partial blame on the Israelis.

Dear o dear o dear. Where did you get that idea from? Egypt has ceded all negotiating rights etc on Gaza to the Palestinians. Jordan has ceded all rights to the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem to the Palestinians.
I suggest you look it up.

Maybe if Israel was recognized by more than two arab nations they'd be more willing to negotiate.

Maybe if they weren't living on stolen land and killing civilians arab nations would be more willing to recognize them.

The Gaza pullout and its aftermath has proven that areas occupied by Israel are a whole lot safer than areas they pull out of.

That area perhaps, but the settlements incite violence in other areas and help keep the conflict running. If anything is helping Hamas stay popular it's more settlements being built.

the Palestinians were once offered what is now 1/2 of all Israel and the didn't take it

I thought the efforts to restart the peace process had been destroyed when Hamas made it clear that they intended to continue fighting until they controlled all of Israel and Palestine. Then as recently said, the entire world.

Then as recently said, the entire world.

Seriously what's the point of peace with one who wants to kill you? Seriously?!

Which side are you talking about again? Neither side is exactly trying very hard for peace.

I'm inclined to believe that the Israeli government and Hamas are scratching each other's backs at the expense of the Palestinian people.

Israel continues its draconian collective punishment approach in dealing with Hamas-sponsored or condoned attacks, which in turn incites Hamas to scream and bitch about Zionist occupation and oppression and how they're trying to destroy the Palestinians. That of course will drive a few impressionable Palestinians to join up with the cause, in all likelihood taking part in the attacks. And those attacks in turn will give the Israeli government justification for not having to make any real serious selfless concessions towards offering peace to the Palestinian people.

Israel gets to wash its hands of treating the Palestinians like human beings, and Hamas gets its Zionist scapegoat to continue remaining in power and popularity as champions of the oppressed and hopeless.

And who takes it up the ass all this time? The common Palestinian people.

The palestinians should be given sophisticated anti-armor weaponry to defeat and prevent this despicable action.

The palestinians should be given sophisticated anti-armor weaponry to defeat and prevent this despicable action.

I agree. Encouraging violent solutions is always the mature and reasonable thing to do.
I know that you aren't being completely serious, but what do you think would be the result of such an action? Israelis would die and the IDF would kill Arabs.

Those Israelies never stop causing trouble, next they will want to annex the US into Israel.

I'm inclined to believe that the Israeli government and Hamas are scratching each other's backs at the expense of the Palestinian people.

Israel continues its draconian collective punishment approach in dealing with Hamas-sponsored or condoned attacks, which in turn incites Hamas to scream and bitch about Zionist occupation and oppression and how they're trying to destroy the Palestinians. That of course will drive a few impressionable Palestinians to join up with the cause, in all likelihood taking part in the attacks. And those attacks in turn will give the Israeli government justification for not having to make any real serious selfless concessions towards offering peace to the Palestinian people.

Israel gets to wash its hands of treating the Palestinians like human beings, and Hamas gets its Zionist scapegoat to continue remaining in power and popularity as champions of the oppressed and hopeless.

And who takes it up the ass all this time? The common Palestinian people.

1984 much?

No, anybody they or their political masters want out of the way. They also kill to 'send a message' and to instill fear in the local populace. Its a practice as old as colonialism. At least 14 UN Personnell alone were killed in Gaza in the last 5-6 years by the IDF.

So you're calling my cousin a brute? Fuck you.

Beyond that, (and sorry for the petty name calling) they don't do anything of the sort. Show me some proof, and even if you don't buy that how is that any different from Palestinians killing innocent Israelis.


It is indeed occupied, and is regarded as such by the international community, as mentioned in the OP. The days of 'mug thy neighbour' are long gone.

And Tibet is also occupied. Is Tibet getting out, no! Does the international community care about Tibet, not really. And the days of mug thy neighbor are not gone just that neighbors don't hate each other anymore or those that do will create nuclear war that would be bad for both sides.

Also tell me one country in the world that 100% follows international law, it's impossible because it doesn't exist. And who do we look for in international law, the UN the same orginazation that lets Sudan, who continue to commit genocide, on their human rights council. Clearly the place to look up to. Yeh United Nations!


'helped'.....Hmmmmm

Apart from the 'dodginess' of land bought at the point of a gun, by the citizens of an alien armed occupying force, at least 40% of settlements are built on land taken outright from Palestinians.
(my bold)
Please never help me like that.

Yes helped. What is better no economy and living in mass desert or a place to get a job? I go with job if you want to die of starvation be my guess but I dont' think most humans are like that.


More than a third of the Jewish settlements in the West Bank are built on privately owned Palestinian land, an Israeli campaign group has reported.
Peace Now says nearly 40% of the land the settlements sit on is, according to official data, "effectively stolen" from Palestinian landowners.
This, the group says, is a violation of Israel's own laws.
Settlements in the occupied West Bank are illegal under international law, although Israel rejects this.

Notice the word "Israeli" there. While that may be true, the fact that there is an Israeli group to report on it means that Israel is already better than the Palestinians as they allow people to speak their minds. Did you see that Haman Mickey Mouse? Does that look like people you want to belive in or follow? People who indoctrinate children to be suicide bombers or would you rather have a country that allows citizens to speak their minds even if it's against official national policy. I go with the later it looks like you want the former.


Dear o dear o dear. Where did you get that idea from? Egypt has ceded all negotiating rights etc on Gaza to the Palestinians. Jordan has ceded all rights to the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem to the Palestinians.
I suggest you look it up.

How about during their peace negotiations? Hmmm... oh yeh well Israel offered Gaza and Egypt said no and I'm sure Israel offered something of the West Bank and Jordan said no. So umm... who should check facts now?


Final thought: You're selectively answering what you want to. You ignore all my quotes about Palestinians being terrorists, all my arguments about how Israel responds only in defense. Espiecially because that's the part I'm saying is most important so you're doing it specifically because you don't want to defend terrorists. But you are and don't try to deny it. And you ignore my arguments about how the settlements in East Jerusalem would be bad, and that it's a plan not neccesarily going to happen.

You're trying to create propoganda while I'm trying to create truth. Even if Israel is not 100% innocent, (Which it isn't) on balance it's better than terrorists. That's my opinion. I don't know why it's not yours.

So you're calling my cousin a brute? Fuck you.

Beyond that, (and sorry for the petty name calling) they don't do anything of the sort. Show me some proof, and even if you don't buy that how is that any different from Palestinians killing innocent Israelis.
He's speaking of the force in general, he can't go through every soldier and assess them individually, the actions have to be assessed as a whole.

Former IDF members describe firing machine guns and grenades into civilian neighbourhoods (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/11/listening_post/main708205.shtml)


The IDF employs a controversial strategy of "focused foiling" (in Hebrew: סיכול ממוקד sikul memukad), termed "extra-judicial executions" by human rights organizations,[6] of presumed Palestinian leaders, claiming that it aims at preventing future acts of violence by killing a person related to anticipated future violence. This policy has been widely condemned by the United Nations and many other countries as it said to be violating The International Humanitarian Law (Hague Convention IV of 1907).
wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces#Criticism)


And Tibet is also occupied. Is Tibet getting out, no! Does the international community care about Tibet, not really. And the days of mug thy neighbor are not gone just that neighbors don't hate each other anymore or those that do will create nuclear war that would be bad for both sides.

Also tell me one country in the world that 100% follows international law, it's impossible because it doesn't exist. And who do we look for in international law, the UN the same orginazation that lets Sudan, who continue to commit genocide, on their human rights council. Clearly the place to look up to. Yeh United Nations!
International Law doesn't exist? That's a new one.


Yes helped. What is better no economy and living in mass desert or a place to get a job? I go with job if you want to die of starvation be my guess but I dont' think most humans are like that.

Jobs that generally aren't for the palestinians.


Notice the word "Israeli" there. While that may be true, the fact that there is an Israeli group to report on it means that Israel is already better than the Palestinians as they allow people to speak their minds. Did you see that Haman Mickey Mouse? Does that look like people you want to belive in or follow? People who indoctrinate children to be suicide bombers or would you rather have a country that allows citizens to speak their minds even if it's against official national policy. I go with the later it looks like you want the former.
In terms of freedom of press it's free, in a lot of other areas it isn't. Discrimination between Jews, and in particular in some areas against women is rife.

He's speaking of the force in general, he can't go through every soldier and assess them individually, the actions have to be assessed as a whole.

Fine.

[QUOTE=Forsakia;12638386]
Former IDF members describe firing machine guns and grenades into civilian neighbourhoods (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/07/11/listening_post/main708205.shtml)



wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces#Criticism)


The criticism there is all about how the IDF can't differentiate between civilians and combatants. It's the same thing in Iraq which person is a terrorist and which person is just trying to live their lives? Sometimes they mess up in guessing. They are human after all.
Is some of what they have done bad, yes, but there is noone who fights in a war that doesn't do something that isn't morally reputable or bad. It's not unique to the IDF yet they get criticised for it. Look at US Army veterans in Vietnam.
Also the CBS shows the Israeli side of it by saying that the Palestinians chose terror and are now being repaid. Lesson: don't choose terror.


International Law doesn't exist? That's a new one.

It's not that it doesn't exist, it's that not every country follows it plus there is doubt as to some of it's validity espiecially in regards to human rights and Israel.


Jobs that generally aren't for the palestinians.

Not true. Palestinians are Israel's version of Mexicans, cheap labor. (Though yeh the quality of the jobs isn't very good I agree)


In terms of freedom of press it's free, in a lot of other areas it isn't. Discrimination between Jews, and in particular in some areas against women is rife.

That's all the orthodox. Everybody in Israel hates the orthodox, except the orthodox and the government, which is run waaaaay to much by the orthodox.

the Palestinians were once offered what is now 1/2 of all Israel and the didn't take itVery funny. Imagine you have a bread. Now someone else comes and "offers" you half of the bread you already have. What would you say?
To offer 1/2 of Palestine to the Palestinian Arabs is rather an insult than an offer.

Isn't that what England, France, and Spain did? If it wasn't for their imperialistic nature most the free world would not exist.
I'm afraid that by effectively ethnically cleansing a city doesn't really count as advancing the cause of freedom, and people would dispute that the Empire did too.

Now, that does not mean I condone such acts however, it may be considered occupied land by the Palestinians, and many other nations, however, Isreal sees Jeruselum as sacred land and therefore theirs to utlize as they see fit. The Palestinians also see this a holy ground, and insist that they must occupy it. Now why can't both side agree that it is holy land, and treat it as such. And sharing isn't such a bad idea.
I agree.

Personally, I have come to the opinion that many Arab nations, and a majority of Palestinians, have no desire for peace with Isreal. Honestly, if the people really wanted peace they woun't have put Hamas in power.
http://www.jmcc.org/publicpoll/results/2007/no61.pdf

Look at question three. Palestinians who support the two-state solution and a bi-national state make up nearly three quarters of the population. It may be a simple terrorists verses non terrorists to us, but to the Palestinian population I doubt it's quite so simple. Not that's it's right, mind. The only way to cut off their support is to create a Palestinian state.

The Isrealis aren't any less to blame for the problems either. I mean just because someone fired a gun, and injured an officer in your military isn't a reason to send in thirty tanks and destroy hundred of homes. Just because a couple of soldiers are kidnapped isn't a reason to send your entire military to attack a neighboring country. This eye for an eye attitude only escalates the problem.
Agreed.

The reality is, if either side really wants peace they need to start looking for it, and stop trying to find reasons to fight.
Agreed.

Also the CBS shows the Israeli side of it by saying that the Palestinians chose terror and are now being repaid. Lesson: don't choose terror. Occupation is terror. Going to a foreign land to create a state is terror. On the other side fighting occupiers and invaders is not terror.

So you're calling my cousin a brute? Fuck you.
.

I never referred to any individual. He is however - as a settler- party to colonisation and a semi-apartheid style of occupation which is reprehensible in the extreme.


Beyond that, (and sorry for the petty name calling) they don't do anything of the sort. Show me some proof, and even if you don't buy that how is that any different from Palestinians killing innocent Israelis. .

I find it strange you are unaware of them. However, taking your word for it.....

A British UN project manager shot by an Israeli sniper was unlawfully killed, a UK inquest has concluded.
Iain Hook, 54, of Felixstowe, Suffolk, was in a UN compound in Jenin when he was shot in November 2002.

On Friday, jurors unanimously agreed Mr Hook, who was born in Essex, had been the victim of a "deliberate" killing.

Earlier Dr Peter Hansen, former Commissioner General of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) said that over the past four years 13 UNRWA workers, including Mr Hook, had been shot in similar circumstances by the Israeli army. (my bold)

Link (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/suffolk/4534620.stm)

"James Miller, 34, from Devon, was shot while making a film about children in the Rafah refugee camp in Gaza in 2003."
"At the inquest, the 10-strong jury heard how James Miller was holding a white flag lit up by a torch when he was shot in the neck"
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/devon/4872444.stm




And Tibet is also occupied. Is Tibet getting out, no! Does the international community care about Tibet, not really.

Some of us indeed do. Tibet is occupied by China, who have managed to keep a better lid on events due to the isolated nature of the region. The Chinese Govt have been bastards to the Tibetans, generally speaking.

How does the Chinese being bastards to the Tibetans justify Israel being bastards to the Palestinians?


Also tell me one country in the world that 100% follows international law, it's impossible because it doesn't exist. And who do we look for in international law, the UN the same orginazation that lets Sudan, who continue to commit genocide, on their human rights council. Clearly the place to look up to. Yeh United Nations!

So because others are bastards its ok to be a bastard pt II. I might add that the UN cannot act without the consent of its members, therefore complaining about UN inaction is rather pointless. Blame the nations not acting or the nations vetoing the action.



Yes helped. What is better no economy and living in mass desert or a place to get a job? I go with job if you want to die of starvation be my guess but I dont' think most humans are like that.

Peoples homes and farmland were taken.



Notice the word "(......)want the former.

Goody for them. You do neglect to metion that the IDF have first viewing and right of veto on all footage to be shown on Israeli media thats deemed "security related" however. However, All they really have to do now is stop building colonies in other peoples land.


Final thought: You're selectively answering what you want to. You ignore all my quotes about Palestinians being terrorists,

"terrorist" is often a matter of opinion. As they are occupied and clearly being colonised they have a right to defend themselves and expel thje occupiers.

all my arguments about how Israel responds only in defense.

You can see how Israel responds above. Neither does it explain or justify 20,000 houses in somebody elses land.

Does this Arab insistance that their territories must be completely free of Jews disturb anyone else?

Yes

And does anyone else not think that if the Arabs can't tolerate the presence of Jews, they're not going to be geniune about peace?

Well said. Well said indeed.

I thought the efforts to restart the peace process had been destroyed when Hamas made it clear that they intended to continue fighting until they controlled all of Israel and Palestine.

That is what I thought.

The Gaza pullout and its aftermath has proven that areas occupied by Israel are a whole lot safer than areas they pull out of.

Because if the IDF did pull out, Hamas and Fatah would be killing eachother for control.

Actually the majority of Palestinians favour a two-state solution, as do the majority of Israelis.

And if we can actually get something like that I will be grateful. Not likely though :(

Occupation is terror. Going to a foreign land to create a state is terror. On the other side fighting occupiers and invaders is not terror.

Blowing up innocent men, women, and children by suicide bombers sent by the leadership is terror. But then, you are an idiot anyway because you cannot understand that.

Five posts in a row and not one addressing the OP......

Blowing up innocent men, women, and children by suicide bombers sent by the leadership is terror. But then, you are an idiot anyway because you cannot understand that.That's just pay-back, nothing else. If a foreign group of people would occupy and continiúously colonize my home land, I would also blow them up indiscriminately. There is no parliamentary opposition against the ongoing colonization, is there? And there are no large protests by Israeli citizens against such policies, are there?
I am European, I know the concepts of invasion and occupation. And both must be fought against by all means, however desperate the means may be. Jews have not wanted peace in the Middle East ever since the Zionist movement was founded, and nothing has changed since then. They want all of what was once Palestine. That has been their goal before and after Palestine was divided into Transjordan and (cisjordanian) Palestine, and they are pursuing this goal step by step. The land grab is going on constantly. The only peace that Israel wants is the peace that will be achieved when Jewish rule over the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean is finally complete.

Five posts in a row and not one addressing the OP......What for? Is expanding Jewish settlement in the West Bank anything new? And has it ever not been supported or condoned by Israeli "authorities"?
When the Israelis were talking about peace a few weeks ago, I already knew they had again planned something against the Palestinians.

What for? Is expanding Jewish settlement in the West Bank anything new? And has it ever not been supported or condoned by Israeli "authorities"?
When the Israelis were talking about peace a few weeks ago, I already knew they had again planned something against the Palestinians.

I was referring to Corneliu..

He's speaking of the force in general, he can't go through every soldier and assess them individually, the actions have to be assessed as a whole.

Fine.



The criticism there is all about how the IDF can't differentiate between civilians and combatants. It's the same thing in Iraq which person is a terrorist and which person is just trying to live their lives? Sometimes they mess up in guessing. They are human after all.
Guessing? The former IDF member describes them blowing up cars that were illegally parked and throwing people out of their homes so they could watch TV. They weren't mixing people up they were just abusing their power.


Is some of what they have done bad, yes, but there is noone who fights in a war that doesn't do something that isn't morally reputable or bad. It's not unique to the IDF yet they get criticised for it. Look at US Army veterans in Vietnam.
Also the CBS shows the Israeli side of it by saying that the Palestinians chose terror and are now being repaid. Lesson: don't choose terror.
Doesn't make it right. If Israel wants to be seen as the good guy it needs to hold itself to a higher standard, as it is it's down in the muck with the terrorrists.



It's not that it doesn't exist, it's that not every country follows it plus there is doubt as to some of it's validity espiecially in regards to human rights and Israel.
Why wouldn't it be valid regarding Israel/human rights? Int'l Law isn't able to be applied as widely as it should be, often due to SC members (mainly the US) vetoeing it's application, but it's still there.


That's all the orthodox. Everybody in Israel hates the orthodox, except the orthodox and the government, which is run waaaaay to much by the orthodox.
Ah, so all of the palestinians are responsible for some of them choosing terror, but with Israel it's only the individuals who infringe on human rights/discriminate/etc who are responsible.

That's all the orthodox. Everybody in Israel hates the orthodox, except the orthodox and the government, which is run waaaaay to much by the orthodox.

So....the average non-orthodox Israeli hates their government?

So....the average non-orthodox Israeli hates their government?

Very probably at the moment. There have been several large scale rallies calling for Olmert to step down.

Israel have never been interested in peace. They initiate uneasy ceasefires when it suits them and continue conflicts when they're winning. The only times Israel has made any positive step towards peace it's been for ulterior motives: Begin gave generously in the Camp David accords simply because he didn't want to lose the support of America, and Sharon only offered the peace deal to Arafat in 2000 because he knew it would mean being able to treat Palestinians as second class citizens.

My guess is that they'll build these settlements, and more, until they eventually run out of space and attack Lebanon again for more territory. And if anyone doen't like that? :mp5:

Very probably at the moment. There have been several large scale rallies calling for Olmert to step down.

That's Olmert though, the Orthodox are (I think) the third largest party in the Knesset, have been about there for a while and hold a fair amount of power.

Israel have never been interested in peace. They initiate uneasy ceasefires when it suits them and continue conflicts when they're winning. The only times Israel has made any positive step towards peace it's been for ulterior motives: Begin gave generously in the Camp David accords simply because he didn't want to lose the support of America, and Sharon only offered the peace deal to Arafat in 2000 because he knew it would mean being able to treat Palestinians as second class citizens.

My guess is that they'll build these settlements, and more, until they eventually run out of space and attack Lebanon again for more territory. And if anyone doen't like that? :mp5:
Eek!

(runs away)

Eek!

(runs away)

lol :D

That's just pay-back, nothing else. If a foreign group of people would occupy and continiúously colonize my home land, I would also blow them up indiscriminately.

I don't doubt it: you've repeatedly shown on this forum that you don't want a an end to the conflict, and that you'd rather see thousands die in a bloody civil war than any kind of compromise with 'the Jews'.

There is no parliamentary opposition against the ongoing colonization, is there?

Of course not, except for the United Arab List, parts of the Labour party, Meretz-Yachad, Hadash, among others. There's even a political party who want to disestablish Israel... :rolleyes:

There are many more parties and groups who want to end the occupation but don't feel that they can do so until the Palestinians commit to a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

And there are no large protests by Israeli citizens against such policies, are there?

Protests at Bil'in, Peace Now, Gush Shalom...

I am European, I know the concepts of invasion and occupation. And both must be fought against by all means, however desperate the means may be. Jews have not wanted peace in the Middle East ever since the Zionist movement was founded, and nothing has changed since then. They want all of what was once Palestine. That has been their goal before and after Palestine was divided into Transjordan and (cisjordanian) Palestine, and they are pursuing this goal step by step. The land grab is going on constantly. The only peace that Israel wants is the peace that will be achieved when Jewish rule over the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean is finally complete.

More of your paranoid anti-semetism I see. If Israel really want to control the whole of Palestine they're not going about it in a very sensible way are they? I don't see how physically dragging settlers out of Gaza would help them in their plans for world domination.

That's Olmert though, the Orthodox are (I think) the third largest party in the Knesset, have been about there for a while and hold a fair amount of power.

Yeah, that's why I said the average 'non-orthodox Israeli'.

Israel have never been interested in peace. They initiate uneasy ceasefires when it suits them and continue conflicts when they're winning. The only times Israel has made any positive step towards peace it's been for ulterior motives: Begin gave generously in the Camp David accords simply because he didn't want to lose the support of America, and Sharon only offered the peace deal to Arafat in 2000 because he knew it would mean being able to treat Palestinians as second class citizens.

My guess is that they'll build these settlements, and more, until they eventually run out of space and attack Lebanon again for more territory. And if anyone doen't like that? :mp5:

Haven't you got a bridge to lurk under?

Haven't you got a bridge to lurk under?

What was trollish about what I wrote? Telling the truth is trolling now?

Because if the IDF did pull out, Hamas and Fatah would be killing eachother for control.

Actually they're killing each other anyway. I saw a cartoon by a Palestinian cartoonist a month or two ago: on the left was a man brandishing an AK-47 and shouting "Hamas!!!"; on the right was an identical man shouting "Fatah!!!"; and in the middle was a woman holding a child saying, in much smaller font, "Gaza".

lol :D
That wasn't a compliment.

Actually they're killing each other anyway. I saw a cartoon by a Palestinian cartoonist a month or two ago: on the left was a man brandishing an AK-47 and shouting "Hamas!!!"; on the right was an identical man shouting "Fatah!!!"; and in the middle was a woman holding a child saying, in much smaller font, "Gaza".

Well, maybe if Palestinians were granted basic citizenship rights, they wouldn't become militant and allow these groups to grow into promenance.

What was trollish about what I wrote? Telling the truth is trolling now?

Calling it the truth doesn't make it so. Neither side is entirely innocent, neither side is entirely guilty. To claim that Israel alone is to blame for the failure of the peace process is either hopelessly naive or trolling, as is the suggestion that the Israel-Hezbollah conflict was a land grab. The gun smilie doesn't help either.

That wasn't a compliment.

Okay then, you disagree, rather than insults state your case. Because I haven't said anything that isn't true.

Calling it the truth doesn't make it so. Neither side is entirely innocent, neither side is entirely guilty. To claim that Israel alone is to blame for the failure of the peace process is either hopelessly naive or trolling, as is the suggestion that the Israel-Hezbollah conflict was a land grab. The gun smilie doesn't help either.

Sharon had his intentions clear at the peace talks. Yes, 92% of land would have gone back to the PNA, but they'd then be completely inside Israel, with thier water system completely controlled and with the iron fences up. If Arafat didn't refuse, he'd have done the Palestinians a disservice.

And as for the Israel Hezbollah conflict...wasn't it revealed by a former minister that the plans to invade Lebanon were drawn out months before the Hezbollah rocket attacks?

Well, maybe if Palestinians were granted basic citizenship rights, they wouldn't become militant and allow these groups to grow into promenance.

Fatah isn't really a millitant movement.

I don't doubt it: you've repeatedly shown on this forum that you don't want a an end to the conflict, and that you'd rather see thousands die in a bloody civil war than any kind of compromise with 'the Jews'.Why should anyone make compromises with invaders and occupiers who have repeatedly shown that they have no interest in peace that would give equality to all? Israel is the reason for the conflict. Her policies, her conduct, her existence. The Jews have once come to create a state at the expense of Arabs, and they still pursue that aim, regardless of all circumstances or injustices the commit on the way. And since they have no interest in seeing Arabs as equal and to return to them what is theirs, they must be opposed by all means.

this is what Israel is really about:
http://www.vtjp.org/images/INCwall_718.jpg
map (http://www.btselem.org/Download/Separation_Barrier_Map_Eng.pdf)

Fatah isn't really a millitant movement.Israel is.

Sharon had his intentions clear at the peace talks. Yes, 92% of land would have gone back to the PNA, but they'd then be completely inside Israel, with thier water system completely controlled and with the iron fences up. If Arafat didn't refuse, he'd have done the Palestinians a disservice.

And as for the Israel Hezbollah conflict...wasn't it revealed by a former minister that the plans to invade Lebanon were drawn out months before the Hezbollah rocket attacks?

At talks one is expected to actually do some talking. Talking doesn't mean starting a campaign of terrorist violence against civilians if you don't get what you want instantly; it involves explaining why the current proposal is unacceptable and then making a counter-proposal. Arafat chose to walk out and start the Intifada instead.

When a country is a peace, its millitary commanders have little to do beyond drawing up war plans for every conceivable situation; I seem to remember that declassified US Cold War documents included a carefully planned campaign to conquer Canada in the event of it joining with the Soviets. I don't know if you're referring to something more specific, but even if that was the case Hezbollah still started the war.

Israel is the reason for the conflict. Her policies, her conduct, her existence.

You prove my point. You'd rather see thousands of innocents die than a compromise which allowed both Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace. You care more for ideology than human life.

You prove my point. You'd rather see thousands of innocents die than a compromise which allowed both Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace. You care more for ideology than human life.It is Israel that exists solely because of ideology.
I care more for justice than a group's need to create and maintain a state at the expense of others. And in a state that exists because of removing the prior inhabitants of the land, there are no 'innocents'. Let them go somewhere else, and all will be fine.

You prove my point. You'd rather see thousands of innocents die than a compromise which allowed both Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace. You care more for ideology than human life.

Apparently so do the Israelis and Palestinians.

I care more for justice than a group's need to create and maintain a state at the expense of others.
When are you going to start a campaign for the PRC to be dissolved?

At talks one is expected to actually do some talking. Talking doesn't mean starting a campaign of terrorist violence against civilians if you don't get what you want instantly; it involves explaining why the current proposal is unacceptable and then making a counter-proposal.

Not if the tone of the meeting was set by an unfair, arrogant offer that both parties know is unfeasable. After that statement, Arafat had two choices. Sharon would never have approved anything remotely fair, so Arafat could have thrashed things out for the next few hours and ended up with nothing, or taken drastic steps to show Israel how vital the issue of fairness was. I'm in no way defending the tactics the PLO used (at any point) but it was the only way he was going to get Sharon to take him seriously. Any possible peace deal between the two that could have followed was immediately made impossible when Arafat died. I don't know whether Sharon or Olmert would have taken him seriously the second time, but if they cared about civilian life they would.

You prove my point. You'd rather see thousands of innocents die than a compromise which allowed both Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace. You care more for ideology than human life.
It's not like Israel couldn't just exist somewhere else - its people could simply move a bit, instead of having to shoot and be shot at by its neighbours, who are really, really not into the whole "tolerating their prescence" thing any more.

There never be a compromise between the two sides - I mean it's been going on since Biblical times and all, what with David and Goliath and all.

At talks one is expected to actually do some talking. Talking doesn't mean starting a campaign of terrorist violence against civilians if you don't get what you want instantly; it involves explaining why the current proposal is unacceptable and then making a counter-proposal.
Indeed - for a great example of that kind of willingness on the part of the Israelis, see Force 101.
When a country is a peace, its millitary commanders have little to do beyond drawing up war plans for every conceivable situation; I seem to remember that declassified US Cold War documents included a carefully planned campaign to conquer Canada in the event of it joining with the Soviets. I don't know if you're referring to something more specific, but even if that was the case Hezbollah still started the war.
Err not quite sure that it was solely Hezbollah's fault to be quite honest. Seeing as the Israelis were really fucking over Palestine at the time, I think it may really have been a diversionary effort that went really horribly wrong for about a thousand Lebanese civilians.

You prove my point. You'd rather see thousands of innocents die than a compromise which allowed both Israelis and Palestinians to live in peace. You care more for ideology than human life.

Israel must know that building a settlement there is going to piss off the Palestinians. The Israeli government is apparently more concerned with fucking with Palestinians then negotiotiating.

On days with news like this, I think I'm on the verge of becoming anti-Semetic.

I wonder if our great, great, great grandkids will have this much fun discussing the Israeli/Palestinian conflict when we're dead and buried?

I wonder if our great, great, great grandkids will have this much fun discussing the Israeli/Palestinian conflict when we're dead and buried?

On a mildly optimistic point, for years the same thing was said about Northern Ireland.

I wonder if our great, great, great grandkids will have this much fun discussing the Israeli/Palestinian conflict when we're dead and buried?
No. By then, one will have wiped out the other, or we'll all just be more busy playing with hypersonic showers, flying shoes and taking day trips to the moon.

Which is more likely?

On a mildly optimistic point, for years the same thing was said about Northern Ireland.
Yeah, well on a slightly pessimistic point, I don't think this current agreement is going to hold, since Sinn Fein and the UDP are completely at odds in terms of ideology.

This can't end well.....

Yeah, well on a slightly pessimistic point, I don't think this current agreement is going to hold, since Sinn Fein and the UDP are completely at odds in terms of ideology.

Perhaps, but we can always hope. And at least they're not shooting each other.

Ah, so all of the palestinians are responsible for some of them choosing terror, but with Israel it's only the individuals who infringe on human rights/discriminate/etc who are responsible.

Israel's Blank Check apologists subscribe to the Evil Muslim Hivemind theory as well.

And at least they're not shooting each other.

Precisely. Its evolving to normal levels of hate, distrust and bitterness. As long as nobodies taking a trip up an unapproved road, no real harm done.

You know, I've come to a point where I just don't care about what happens to Israel anymore.

They've never been interested in peace with their neighbors. They've been aggressive bullies the entire time their country has existed (remember Sudan? lovely!), and they treat all non-Jews as second- and third-class humans.Yeah, the killing is horrible, and the loss of life is something that can never be forgiven (on either side). But, guess what? I don't care anymore. Not one fucking bit. And I honestly hope that Israel is dissolved within the next decade or so, because that would be damn good remittance for what they've done to the region.

Yeah, Islamic theocracies are bad, too (then again, aren't all governments that mix religion with politics?). But I can say without a doubt in my mind that the Jewish state has done more harm than any of the Islamic states. Saddam Hussein may have been a horrible tyrant, killing hundreds of thousands of his own people, but Israel has done so much more damage in its sixty-odd years of existence. This isn't an either-or situation. I don't like any of the governments in the Middle East or even Northern Africa. But out of all of them, Israel's is the worst, and I'd like to see that particular abomination wiped off the planet first and foremost.

And don't start with the obligatory "You're just an anti-Semite" comments, either. I have Jewish relatives (my dad's sister married a Jewish man, and their children were raised Jewish), so watch it. They may not agree with me completely on this subject, but they agree with me largely still. So I find it rather hard to believe that any half-way intelligent person could actually agree with what Israel's done.

I honestly have no respect for those people, that's for sure.

In all honesty, if I had the power to cram peace down their throats I'd give East Jerusalem to Israel, the Gaza Strip, and the rest of the West Bank to Palestine, and force both sides to offer "displaced" people on their side dual citizenship in Israel and Palestine. Unfortunately, I don't have that sort of power, and I imagine both sides are too stubborn to accept a fair division.
That's pretty close to what a lot of Israelis have in mind. They plan to keep a few select areas of the West Bank (areas that are mostly inhabited by Jewish settlers, not Arabs), and exchange them for a small slice of Israel that is 100% Arab.

And most Israelis do want peace. However, Hamas is still committed to Israel's destruction. Right now, the Israelis are basically sitting tight until one of two things happens:
1. Hamas moderates its policies, recognizes Israel's right to exist. After a prisoner swap (say, 300 Palestinian terrorists for one Israeli soldier), negotiations can start.
2. Abbas & Fatah take back power, whether through a coup (with Mossad assistance), or through another election. Negotiations can start.

In the meantime, the Israelis are figuring out how to clean up their current internal political mess.
As for the Palestinians, I believe that most of them want peace, if nothing else for the same reason the Israelis want peace - they're sick and tired of war. They made a mistake by electing Hamas into power, which I hope that they figure out by next election.
You see, at the time of the elections, Hamas was seen as free of corruption, while Fatah is horribly corrupt. So the Palestinians voted Hamas into power. However, they soon discovered that almost nobody likes Hamas, so the aid stopped coming and the peace process stopped happening.

And as for the 'colonization' claims, Israel was, before the Jewish settlers arrived at the start of the 20th century, mostly wasteland. Settlers came in, bought the land for ridiculously high prices from the Arab landlords who owned it, and turned it into farmland.
Most of the Arabs fled during the War of Independence in 1948, for the obvious reason that living in a war zone has a bad impact on your life expectancy.

That's just pay-back, nothing else. If a foreign group of people would occupy and continiuously colonize my home land, I would also blow them up indiscriminately.
I can see from this and other posts that you think that Israel should not exist and should be dismantled. You also support the killing of Israeli civilians.

This singling out of the Jewish state for condemnation, attacking its very right to exist, declaring that the Jews are invaders and occupiers, this IS anti-Semitism. I will give you a chance to at least recognize Israel's right to exist. If you don't, I'll still debate you, but you will be, in my mind, an anti-Semite.

And Potarius, please explain exactly what horrific human rights abuses Israel has committed that in any way compare to Darfur. Has Israel sponsored militias to rape, murder, and expel the Palestinians from their land?

That's pretty close to what a lot of Israelis have in mind. They plan to keep a few select areas of the West Bank (areas that are mostly inhabited by Jewish settlers, not Arabs), and exchange them for a small slice of Israel that is 100% Arab.

And most Israelis do want peace. However, Hamas is still committed to Israel's destruction. Right now, the Israelis are basically sitting tight until one of two things happens:
1. Hamas moderates its policies, recognizes Israel's right to exist. After a prisoner swap (say, 300 Palestinian terrorists for one Israeli soldier), negotiations can start.
2. Abbas & Fatah take back power, whether through a coup (with Mossad assistance), or through another election. Negotiations can start.
.

Israel either don't want peace, or are really stupid in how they're going about it. The war with Lebanon, and the building of new settlements on the occupied territories hands Hamas more support. If you wanted to damage the Palestinian peace movement, then a Mossad assisted coup to put them in power'd be a good way to start.

If I remember rightly, last time they built a new settlement they held talks with Fateh just before, not much accomplished but dialogue opened, both sides said it was positive etc, then a week later Israel announced a new settlement and Fateh looked like idiots.

The picture of Israel trying for peace and waiting for the Palestinians to also agree is very innacurate.

I don't doubt it: you've repeatedly shown on this forum that you don't want a an end to the conflict, and that you'd rather see thousands die in a bloody civil war than any kind of compromise with 'the Jews'.

No he does not want peace. He has shown that he wants all the jews killed because of their so called "invasion" of the middle east.

Of course not, except for the United Arab List, parts of the Labour party, Meretz-Yachad, Hadash, among others. There's even a political party who want to disestablish Israel... :rolleyes:

DAMN!!!

There are many more parties and groups who want to end the occupation but don't feel that they can do so until the Palestinians commit to a peaceful resolution to the conflict.

Here here

Protests at Bil'in, Peace Now, Gush Shalom...

QFT

More of your paranoid anti-semetism I see. If Israel really want to control the whole of Palestine they're not going about it in a very sensible way are they? I don't see how physically dragging settlers out of Gaza would help them in their plans for world domination.

I agree with you.

Actually they're killing each other anyway. I saw a cartoon by a Palestinian cartoonist a month or two ago: on the left was a man brandishing an AK-47 and shouting "Hamas!!!"; on the right was an identical man shouting "Fatah!!!"; and in the middle was a woman holding a child saying, in much smaller font, "Gaza".

A good distinct point!

And as for the Israel Hezbollah conflict...wasn't it revealed by a former minister that the plans to invade Lebanon were drawn out months before the Hezbollah rocket attacks?

HELLO!! Any nation would have war plans drawn up in case it was needed. That makes perfectly good sense, especially in THAT region.

It is Israel that exists solely because of ideology.

For which, I will call BULLSHIT on you again. Just face it. You are an anti-semite on this forum and not a very good one either.

I care more for justice than a group's need to create and maintain a state at the expense of others.

If you care at all for justice then you would stop calling for the killing of innocent men, wome, and children. What of the justice for their deaths at the hands of terrorists? Oh wait! Why am I asking you that for. :headbang:

And in a state that exists because of removing the prior inhabitants of the land, there are no 'innocents'. Let them go somewhere else, and all will be fine.

There are no innocence anywhere.

Not if the tone of the meeting was set by an unfair, arrogant offer that both parties know is unfeasable.

Alot of proposals start out that way and then turn into something that is agreeable. That is called NEGOTIATIONS!!! Learn the word dude/ette

And as for the 'colonization' claims, Israel was, before the Jewish settlers arrived at the start of the 20th century, mostly wasteland. Settlers came in, bought the land for ridiculously high prices from the Arab landlords who owned it, and turned it into farmland.
Most of the Arabs fled during the War of Independence in 1948, for the obvious reason that living in a war zone has a bad impact on your life expectancy.


Firstly this thread is about whats happening now, and whats proposed for Arab East Jerusalem - 20,000 Houses. Thats colonisation.

Secondly, for the nth time, only 8% of what became Israel was bought from the Arabs by the Zionist Settlers. You may go and look it up. Its around 400,000 Dunums.

Thirdly, you neglect to mention that the fear of life expectancy was due to Israeli military action, deliberate expulsion and fear of massacre.

Alot of proposals start out that way and then turn into something that is agreeable. That is called NEGOTIATIONS!!! Learn the word dude/ette


Why are you in this thread if you've no intention of referring to the OP at all?

Why are you in this thread if you've no intention of referring to the OP at all?

Since when do I have to refer to the OP to make comments that people made? Oh wait!! I DON'T!! :D

Since when do I have to refer to the OP to make comments that people made? Oh wait!! I DON'T!! :D

Yeah, but seeing as I brought it up......twice.....

Yeah, but seeing as I brought it up......twice.....

And seeing that I am not doing it means nothing. I do not have to reply to any post I do not want to. So go blow it out your pipes!

And seeing that I am not doing it means nothing. I do not have to reply to any post I do not want to. So go blow it out your pipes!

And from that we can all draw our own conclusions.

Thirdly, you neglect to mention that the fear of life expectancy was due to Israeli military action, deliberate expulsion and fear of massacre.
Then why did they only leave just after the Israelis declared independence, despite the fighting that was already happening?
Might it have been that five Arab nations (Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Transjordan, and Iraq, IIRC) had announced their intentions to invade, and they didn't want to end up as collateral damage?

As for what is happening now, East Jerusalem is Israeli territory. If they want to set up a housing development there, they have every right to do so. Have they stated that Arabs will not be able to live there?
Now, if this was happening inside the West Bank, which is not officially Israeli territory, then that might be colonization. It would certainly be a bad idea politically.

As for what is happening now, East Jerusalem is Israeli territory. If they want to set up a housing development there, they have every right to do so. Have they stated that Arabs will not be able to live there?
Now, if this was happening inside the West Bank, which is not officially Israeli territory, then that might be colonization. It would certainly be a bad idea politically.

East Jerusalem is part of the occupied territories. Israel passed a law declaring it as its territory, but the UN SC unanimously voted (with the USA abstaining) the law to be contrary to Int'l law and null and void. Colonisation indeed.

It disgusts me that Israel is taking such a soft line on terrorist groups such as Hamas. It is refraining from colonizing large swaths of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and instead focusing its activities on small plots of land. This only encourages radical Islamists to launch rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. Israel should immediately demand the following:


That Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist.
That Hamas give Israel its weapon caches.
That anti-Israeli propaganda cease to be broadcasted.
That all those who espouse an anti-Israeli viewpoint be arrested.


For every day that Palestine does not comply with those requirements, Israel should bombard Palestine, hindering the extremists' ability to wage their gruesome campaign of civilian death. Furthermore, for every week that Palestine fails to live up to those conditions, Israel should annex 10 square kilometers of Palestinian land and construct settlements there. There can be no peace until Palestinians put down their arms; until then, Israel should do everything in its power to subdue the brutal terrorists.

It disgusts me that Israel is taking such a soft line on terrorist groups such as Hamas. It is refraining from colonizing large swaths of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and instead focusing its activities on small plots of land. This only encourages radical Islamists to launch rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. Israel should immediately demand the following:


That Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist.
That Hamas give Israel its weapon caches.
That anti-Israeli propaganda cease to be broadcasted.
That all those who espouse an anti-Israeli viewpoint be arrested.


For every day that Palestine does not comply with those requirements, Israel should bombard Palestine, hindering the extremists' ability to wage their gruesome campaign of civilian death. Furthermore, for every week that Palestine fails to live up to those conditions, Israel should annex 10 square kilometers of Palestinian land and construct settlements there. There can be no peace until Palestinians put down their arms; until then, Israel should do everything in its power to subdue the brutal terrorists.

Means To An End strikes again. Notice the bold part folks? Funny how someone with "Freedom" in the account name would advocate censorship and sedition laws no? And of course the crack-pipe call for draconian measures to bring about total Palestinian submission.

But what really worries me is that Kahanist fruitcakes on NSG like IDF and Mirkana would read this and actually think or say, "Hey, this is a damn terrific idea!! Mazel Tov!"

Funny how someone with "Freedom" in the account name would advocate censorship and sedition laws no? And of course the crack-pipe call for draconian measures to bring about total Palestinian submission.

Liberal hand-wringing won't solve the problem, either. Hamas and other terrorist groups are willing to continue their campaign of butchery against the state of Israel because they don't have much to lose; Israel has adopted overly pacifist policies and, as a result, they have incurred an onslaught of missiles. A tough-love approach is needed to eradicate such vile ideologies both physically by killing radicals and socially by stopping their proliferation. Will it violate freedom of speech? That depends on how narrow your definition of that right is. When faced with bloodthirsty terrorists who seek to slaughter as many innocent Israelis as possible, it seems to be a necessary measure. The right to life is paramount and trumps all other rights; in this case, only the right to advocate an extremist viewpoint will be taken away, a potentially life-saving measure, and one which will certainly expediate the peace process. Instead of strictly sticking to a particular doctrine, it is best to objectively consider the pros and cons. In this case, the former clearly take precedence. Additionally, I don't consider wanting peace "draconian" nor a "crack-pipe idea." Sure, it may be a bit optimistic, but is that such a bad thing?

It disgusts me that Israel is taking such a soft line on terrorist groups such as Hamas. It is refraining from colonizing large swaths of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and instead focusing its activities on small plots of land.

Thank God for that. They should not even be colonizing the West Bank.

Thank God for that. They should not even be colonizing the West Bank.

I think MTAE was the one who also wanted a world ruled by Israel?

If only the mods had some kind of special button like "electrocute user" which would fry their computer and the troll behind it. Might make them think twice about being douchebags.

I think MTAE was the one who also wanted a world ruled by Israel?

If only the mods had some kind of special button like "electrocute user" which would fry their computer and the troll behind it. Might make them think twice about being douchebags.

And that is all trolls like UB and OD and MTAE and any other poster I could name that is known as a troll around here.

i think Palestine should get over itself

When they were a colony of Britain the land was given to the Jews
live with it
You may think its wrong but it happened

The USA doesn't launch terrorist acts against Britain because of the Quartering act

i think Palestine should get over itself

When they were a colony of Britain the land was given to the Jews
live with it

WRONG!!! It was NOT given to the Jews. It was given to the Brits to establish two states. One for Israel and the other for Palestine

The USA doesn't launch terrorist acts against Britain because of the Quartering act

No we just fought a revolutionary war that lasted 8 years.

now we don't launch fight Britain for it! Thats my point. It happened deal with it.

now we don't launch fight Britain for it! Thats my point. It happened deal with it.

And it ended in 1783. That was when it was settled. It was settled in Paris when Britain gave us our independence. :headbang:

And who takes it up the ass all this time? The common Palestinian people.
Well yeah they do, as do the common Isreali people, who get blown-up or shot while shopping at the grocery store, at weddings and in restaurants. To name a few.

It sucks to be on either side.



Very funny. Imagine you have a bread. Now someone else comes and "offers" you half of the bread you already have. What would you say? To offer 1/2 of Palestine to the Palestinian Arabs is rather an insult than an offer.
Um... Well for one thing, there was no "Palestine" then, and there really isn't a "Palestine" now. Only the hope for one. So that argument doesn't quite hold up.

i think Palestine should get over itself

When they were a colony of Britain the land was given to the Jews
live with it
You may think its wrong but it happenedIt was wrong, and still is wrong, and there is no reason why this mistake should or could not be corrected.

The USA doesn't launch terrorist acts against Britain because of the Quartering actBut maybe native Americans should.

Um... Well for one thing, there was no "Palestine" then, and there really isn't a "Palestine" now. Only the hope for one. So that argument doesn't quite hold up.That's complete rubbish. This is not about the name of the area. It's about the people living there. And you also know pretty well, that the area has been named Palestine since Roman times, and it was surely named Palestine during and after Turkish rule there. The fact of the matter is rather that Israel never existed back then.

But what really worries me is that Kahanist fruitcakes on NSG like IDF and Mirkana would read this and actually think or say, "Hey, this is a damn terrific idea!! Mazel Tov!"
Call me a Kahanist fruitcake again and I'll arrange for Mossad to kill you... by beating you to death with Kahane's severed limbs.

First point, I agree with. Second one, won't happen. Third, impossible to enforce. Fourth, any Israeli government that tries this one deserves to die in a military coup.

FreedomAndGlory, you are an extremist. Your proposal would wreck the peace process faster than nuking Camp David in the middle of negotiations. Not to mention that it violates the rights of the Palestinians to things like free speech, their own land - oh, and the right not to suffer because they can't stop the militants from being anti-Israel.

What for? Is expanding Jewish settlement in the West Bank anything new? And has it ever not been supported or condoned by Israeli "authorities"?
When the Israelis were talking about peace a few weeks ago, I already knew they had again planned something against the Palestinians.

kind of like how how Yasser Arafat talked about peace but then decided to go to war against the Israelis instead?

Then why did they only leave just after the Israelis declared independence, despite the fighting that was already happening?
Might it have been that five Arab nations (Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Transjordan, and Iraq, IIRC) had announced their intentions to invade, and they didn't want to end up as collateral damage.

Not only did the palestinians leave to avoid being collateral damage but Arab leaders (dont know enough to tell you which ones exactly) told them to leave, and that they could come back after all the Jews had been killed! Can you really blame the Isrealis for not allowing them to come back to Isreal after the Isreali War of Independence? After all, the Arab people in palestine had followed the orders (and often threats i'll admit) of their corrupt leaders.

... the rights of the Palestinians to things like free speech, their own land - ...you say that Palestinians have a right to their own land? where? and in what boundaries? outside the Jewish settlements in the West Bank? or outside the occupied territories? wherever Israel wants? or where exactly?

Call me a Kahanist fruitcake again and I'll arrange for Mossad to kill you... by beating you to death with Kahane's severed limbs.

First point, I agree with. Second one, won't happen. Third, impossible to enforce. Fourth, any Israeli government that tries this one deserves to die in a military coup.

FreedomAndGlory, you are an extremist. Your proposal would wreck the peace process faster than nuking Camp David in the middle of negotiations. Not to mention that it violates the rights of the Palestinians to things like free speech, their own land - oh, and the right not to suffer because they can't stop the militants from being anti-Israel.

If you want to waste MOSSAD's time and resources on something unproductive, be my guest. But seriously, it looks like you're not a hardcore Kahanist like the so-called NSG "Jew Crew". At least you realize the Palestinians aren't Jihadist Hiveminds.

And don't even give serious credit to FreedomAndGlory aka MeansToAndEnd and whatever hyperbole he comes up with. He's an attention whore pure and simple.

Alot of proposals start out that way and then turn into something that is agreeable. That is called NEGOTIATIONS!!! Learn the word dude/ette

Well, not that I know much about Yasser Arafat's mindset, but to me it looks clear. Sharon set the entire tone for the meeting in the first few seconds, and it's evident he saw Arafat as some kind of joke.

Not only did the palestinians leave to avoid being collateral damage but Arab leaders (dont know enough to tell you which ones exactly) told them to leave, and that they could come back after all the Jews had been killed! Can you really blame the Isrealis for not allowing them to come back to Isreal after the Isreali War of Independence? After all, the Arab people in palestine had followed the orders (and often threats i'll admit) of their corrupt leaders.

Wait, wait, wait. Let's get this straight. Arab leaders told the Palestinians "Get out while we have our war. You can come back when we're done". And you're saying this justifies Israeli occupation?

How's that any different than residents of a block running off just as a gang war breaks out and coming back only to find the winning gang sitting in their homes?

It disgusts me that Israel is taking such a soft line on terrorist groups such as Hamas. It is refraining from colonizing large swaths of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and instead focusing its activities on small plots of land. This only encourages radical Islamists to launch rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. Israel should immediately demand the following:


That Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist.
That Hamas give Israel its weapon caches.
That anti-Israeli propaganda cease to be broadcasted.
That all those who espouse an anti-Israeli viewpoint be arrested.


For every day that Palestine does not comply with those requirements, Israel should bombard Palestine, hindering the extremists' ability to wage their gruesome campaign of civilian death. Furthermore, for every week that Palestine fails to live up to those conditions, Israel should annex 10 square kilometers of Palestinian land and construct settlements there. There can be no peace until Palestinians put down their arms; until then, Israel should do everything in its power to subdue the brutal terrorists.

I bet you wish Menachem Begin was still in office, don't you? :rolleyes:

It disgusts me that Israel is taking such a soft line on terrorist groups such as Hamas. It is refraining from colonizing large swaths of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and instead focusing its activities on small plots of land. This only encourages radical Islamists to launch rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. Israel should immediately demand the following:


That Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist.
That Hamas give Israel its weapon caches.
That anti-Israeli propaganda cease to be broadcasted.
That all those who espouse an anti-Israeli viewpoint be arrested.


For every day that Palestine does not comply with those requirements, Israel should bombard Palestine, hindering the extremists' ability to wage their gruesome campaign of civilian death. Furthermore, for every week that Palestine fails to live up to those conditions, Israel should annex 10 square kilometers of Palestinian land and construct settlements there. There can be no peace until Palestinians put down their arms; until then, Israel should do everything in its power to subdue the brutal terrorists.

Ah, Mr Begin. So glad you've joined us :rolleyes:

you say that Palestinians have a right to their own land? where? and in what boundaries? outside the Jewish settlements in the West Bank? or outside the occupied territories? or where exactly?

I will be happy to clarify.

What I propose is that they get the Gaza Strip and most of the West Bank (not including Jerusalem). The Israelis can keep a few areas of the West Bank - areas that are inhabited by Jewish settlers and not Arabs - in return for giving the Palestinians a few bits of Israel that are inhabited by Arabs. I believe that an Israeli MP recently suggested this kind of land swap. Exactly what parts of the West Bank the Israelis keep should be determined by negotiations.

It may come out that the Palestinians will only part with Jerusalem if they get every last square inch of the West Bank outside Jerusalem. If that were the case, then I would be OK with giving them that for the sake of peace. However, it might be fair for them to foot some of the expenses of forcibly evacuating settlers from the West Bank - pulling out of the West Bank will be slightly more painful for Israel than having your genitals operated on without anesthesia, so the Palestinians should do what they can to ease the peace process along.

Why not Jerusalem? Because dividing a city never works out well, and Israel has its capital - including all the major government infrastructure - in West Jerusalem. The city is majority Jewish. The Muslims can and do administer their holy sites. The current setup is fine.

Its a real shame that at the end of WW2 the allied powers did not give a chunk of the USA or Canada or Australia as the new Jewish homeland. There is plenty of unpopulated space in these countries and this would have made a different world.

Ogden, the Jews wanted Palestine. Besides, they were already there by the end of World War II.

Not only did the palestinians leave to avoid being collateral damage but Arab leaders (dont know enough to tell you which ones exactly) told them to leave, and that they could come back after all the Jews had been killed! Can you really blame the Isrealis for not allowing them to come back to Isreal after the Isreali War of Independence? After all, the Arab people in palestine had followed the orders (and often threats i'll admit) of their corrupt leaders.

Er, Idon't know whether anybody gets this but the Palistinians were there first! Also they are Ethnically exactly the same as the Jews. Its just that they Converted to Islam instead of remaining Jewish and leaving for Europe. Any Americans should remember that on the logic used for the jews and israel, Native Americans should be able to eject all non Indian citizens of North America!

Its a real shame that at the end of WW2 the allied powers did not give a chunk of the USA or Canada or Australia as the new Jewish homeland. There is plenty of unpopulated space in these countries and this would have made a different world.the jews were offered alternative places. but out of ideology they rejected everything. after all, they believe they are god's darlings and deserve to live in palestine while all the palestinians are just non-humans that can be removed and slaughtered to give the land to the immigrating/invading jews. they even wanted transjordan for themselves. and then they have just never understood why the heck the arabs didn't want to leave their homes and land to make room for the chosen people, chosen by god and the UN.

Ogden, the Jews wanted Palestine. Besides, they were already there by the end of World War II.because they have immigrated en masse since the 1890s. prior to that only around 5 to 8 % of the population of palestine had been jewish in the past 1300 or so years. that percentage is the 'natural' jewish population of palestine.

Nope. Got your facts seriously wrong. Palestinians are Arabs, who moved in when the Muslims conquered the region in 600s. Jews are, well, Jews - a unique ethnic group that came there over 3000 years ago. Most of the Jews were expelled after the Bar-Kochba Revolt in 125 CE.

Then the Jews started coming back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. For more details, read up on your history. I'd recommend Israel by Martin Gilbert. Beleriand could probably give you something from a Palestinian perspective - any suggestions, UB?

As for the other inhabitants of the land, those who were in Palestine before the Jews showed up were either assimilated or wiped out by the invading Jews (read the Book of Joshua for details).

It disgusts me that Israel is taking such a soft line on terrorist groups such as Hamas. It is refraining from colonizing large swaths of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and instead focusing its activities on small plots of land. This only encourages radical Islamists to launch rocket attacks against Israeli civilians.
Right... well not only are you relating two things that are completely unconnected, there's also a huge flaw in this argument.

Basically, if you continue to piss people off by colonising their land, then they're going to get more desperate - ironically, since Hamas have taken power there have been far fewer suicide bombings than before, and that's in part due to Hamas becoming a more political institution but also because the Israelis aren't entirely interesting in pissing off an elected group of what some would term terrorists, seeing as they now have quite a lot of control.
Israel should immediately demand the following:


That Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist.
That Hamas give Israel its weapon caches.
That anti-Israeli propaganda cease to be broadcasted.
That all those who espouse an anti-Israeli viewpoint be arrested.

Ok, well it's equally reasonable that Palestine demands the following:


That Israel ceases to exist, and all borders are opened.
The the IDF lays down its weapons.
That anti-Palestinian propaganda ceases to be shown.
That all those calling Hamas a terrorist movement be arrested.


Or can you think of a really, really solid reason why that shouldn't be the case?
For every day that Palestine does not comply with those requirements, Israel should bombard Palestine, hindering the extremists' ability to wage their gruesome campaign of civilian death.
Because that's not stupendously ironic, now, is it?

"BOMB THEM SO THEY DON'T KILL ANY CIVILIANS!"

Do you even know how many Israeli civilians have been killed in the last, say, 6 months by Palestinians?

I don't have the statistics around, but I'm willing to bet that it's less than 100 people.
Furthermore, for every week that Palestine fails to live up to those conditions, Israel should annex 10 square kilometers of Palestinian land and construct settlements there.
Then every week that the Israelis keep this crap up, you will get mass civilian deaths through suicide bombings. Cause and effect and all.
There can be no peace until Palestinians put down their arms; until then, Israel should do everything in its power to subdue the brutal terrorists.
When tyranny from a foreign power is the circumstance, then resistance is the answer. That's the same all over the world, and it's exactly what would happen if Israel went on a little crusade around Palestine. You can take away peoples' weapons, but if you're arresting people for political reasons, and taking their land, then you will always be fought back against.

See Romania, where the leaders of the country were pulled out of their homes and killed for essentially doing the same within their own borders.

the jews were offered alternative places. but out of ideology they rejected everything. after all, they believe they are god's darlings and deserve to live in palestine while all the palestinians are just non-humans that can be removed and slaughtered to give the land to the immigrating/invading jews.
Err this is plainly, plainly anti-Semitic.

Basically, they were offered Kenya, which was about to have an uprising against the British Empire, and things were extremely shaky, so for some strange reason they didn't want that.

The whole thing about Palestine is mainly because the UK was given Palestine as a mandate, and after we tried to give them Kenya (which was kind of rubbish) we then offered them the next-crappest land, which was Palestine, which was either pretty rocky or pretty swampy at this point.

This kind of usefully coincided with the Zionist movement, as far as the UK saw it, so the deal was pretty much done.
they even wanted transjordan for themselves.
Can't verify this either way, so you give it a go, and please can you leave out anything with an "ARRRGH! THE J3WS!" thing to it, please?
and then they have just never understood why the heck the arabs didn't want to leave their homes and land to make room for the chosen people, chosen by god and the UN.
Actually, I'm even more sure that in their heart of hearts, most Israelis do understand that, but there's a kind of us-or-them mentality in the region.

To be honest, I don't think it's anything to do with the whole "chosen people" thing.

Tell me: what have Arabs done to deserve to be punished with a foreign Jewish state in their home land? What?

Err this is plainly, plainly anti-Semitic.Better to be anti-Semitic than to be against Semites.

Basically, they were offered Kenya, which was about to have an uprising against the British Empire, and things were extremely shaky, so for some strange reason they didn't want that.If they had just wanted their own territory to be left alone, they would have accepted any offer. But they wanted Palestine. They expected Palestine to be just waiting for the Jews to come and settle it, as if it were an empty land with no inhabitants.

The whole thing about Palestine is mainly because the UK was given Palestine as a mandate, and after we tried to give them Kenya (which was kind of rubbish) we then offered them the next-crappest land, which was Palestine, which was either pretty rocky or pretty swampy at this point.The British were not supposed to give away anything over the heads of the area's inhabitants as they were only supposed to administer the area on behalf of the population until the population would find a modus of government.

This kind of usefully coincided with the Zionist movement, as far as the UK saw it, so the deal was pretty much done.To put the desire of Zionists over the needs of the population the UK was supposed to protect, was a crime and still is. But that error could still be corrected.

Can't verify this either way, so you give it a go, and please can you leave out anything with an "ARRRGH! THE J3WS!" thing to it, please?In 1923 the territory of the Palestine mandate was divided and Transjordan was excluded from further discussions dealing with the 'Jewish National Home'. Prior to that Zionists had demanded the entire area of the mandate to become Eretz Israel.

Actually, I'm even more sure that in their heart of hearts, most Israelis do understand that, but there's a kind of us-or-them mentality in the region.If it's us-or-them then I'm on the side of the Palestinian Arabs and not on that of the immigrants/invaders.

To be honest, I don't think it's anything to do with the whole "chosen people" thing.The root of the entire Israel thing is Judaism, and the root of Judaism is the belief to be in a special relationship with a certain god, who chose them as 'his' people and who 'gave' them the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean (and even more than that). There was and is no reason ever to have a Jewish state in Palestine, except religion and what derived from it.

Welcome back, Means. We missed you so much.

It disgusts me that Israel is taking such a soft line on terrorist groups such as Hamas. It is refraining from colonizing large swaths of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip and instead focusing its activities on small plots of land.
Right, you call collective punishment against the entire Palestinian population a 'soft line', do you?

In any case, colonisation isn't a specific anti-Hamas defence policy. It started off as defence against Jordan and Egypt when they held those parts of the West Bank and Gaza. Of course, it doesn't work against terrorists because they operate differently to a bog-standard army.

This only encourages radical Islamists to launch rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. Israel should immediately demand the following:
If anything, colonisation aids groups like Hamas: you don't think people missiled, separated from their family, or turfed out their homes go off and support Israel, do you?

That Hamas recognize Israel's right to exist.
And Palestine could ask Israel to recognise its right to exist.

That Hamas give Israel its weapon caches.
...that the IDF stop bombing civilians.

That anti-Israeli propaganda cease to be broadcasted.

That all those who espouse an anti-Israeli viewpoint be arrested.
Remind me, why did you put 'freedom' in your name, again? Is it in order to persuade yourself that you do believe in freedom?

For every day that Palestine does not comply with those requirements, Israel should bombard Palestine, hindering the extremists' ability to wage their gruesome campaign of civilian death.
So, to stop the deaths of civilians, you want to, let me see, kill more civilians!

Way to win the hearts and minds of Palestine, FAG.

Furthermore, for every week that Palestine fails to live up to those conditions, Israel should annex 10 square kilometers of Palestinian land and construct settlements there.
Yeah, and that's going to persuade people in Palestine that Israel isn't the bogeyman that Hamas says they are, right?

There can be no peace until Palestinians put down their arms; until then, Israel should do everything in its power to subdue the brutal terrorists.
There can't be any peace until the occupation of the Palestinian territories ends. No occupation, no colonisation, no checkpoints, no problem.

Err this is plainly, plainly anti-Semitic.

Basically, they were offered Kenya, which was about to have an uprising against the British Empire, and things were extremely shaky, so for some strange reason they didn't want that.

The whole thing about Palestine is mainly because the UK was given Palestine as a mandate, and after we tried to give them Kenya (which was kind of rubbish) we then offered them the next-crappest land, which was Palestine, which was either pretty rocky or pretty swampy at this point.
Don't forget the generous offer of a swamp in Siberia. :p

Nope. Got your facts seriously wrong. Palestinians are Arabs, who moved in when the Muslims conquered the region in 600s. Jews are, well, Jews - a unique ethnic group that came there over 3000 years ago. Most of the Jews were expelled after the Bar-Kochba Revolt in 125 CE.

Then the Jews started coming back in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. For more details, read up on your history. I'd recommend Israel by Martin Gilbert. Beleriand could probably give you something from a Palestinian perspective - any suggestions, UB?

As for the other inhabitants of the land, those who were in Palestine before the Jews showed up were either assimilated or wiped out by the invading Jews (read the Book of Joshua for details).

While ethnic groups are clearly undefined and a mixture etc, some portions of the Palestinian people and Lebanese are descended from the people living there when the Jews invaded in Biblical times.

Then why did they only leave just after the Israelis declared independence, despite the fighting that was already happening?
.

They left for the reasons I stated, as massacres and expulsions became more common and indeed likely.


As for what is happening now, East Jerusalem is Israeli territory.
.

Arab East Jerusalem has the same international status as the West Bank.


..... but Arab leaders (dont know enough to tell you which ones exactly)......

Yep, thats true. Possibly because they didnt. Read "Birth of the Palestinian Refugee problem revisited" by Benny Morris.

kind of like how how Yasser Arafat talked about peace but then decided to go to war against the Israelis instead?

Do not try to use facts with UB. He is a fool who is an anti-semite and cannot look at things logically.

Well, not that I know much about Yasser Arafat's mindset, but to me it looks clear. Sharon set the entire tone for the meeting in the first few seconds, and it's evident he saw Arafat as some kind of joke.

And Britain did the same fucking thing in 1814 and the war ended in a draw. WOW!!! :rolleyes:

Ogden, the Jews wanted Palestine. Besides, they were already there by the end of World War II.

That is a true statement but Ogden is a troll and needs to be ignored.

the jews were offered alternative places. but out of ideology they rejected everything.

And yet most of the jews that wanted their own homeland were secular so the ideological arguments fly out the window. But then, you honestly do not care for facts.

Better to be anti-Semitic than to be against Semites.

WOW!!! Now this is signature worthy. That is one funny line What do you think an anti-semite is fool. You just showed yourself to be a dumb ass with this line.

WOW!!! Now this is signature worthy. That is one funny line What do you think an anti-semite is fool. You just showed yourself to be a dumb ass with this line.

He could be making the point that anti-semitic is often used to mean anti-jewish, whereas in actual fact the word semites refers to the Palestinians and other peoples of the middle east as well.

It's unlikely, but he could be.

He could be making the point that anti-semitic is often used to mean anti-jewish, whereas in actual fact the word semites refers to the Palestinians and other peoples of the middle east as well.

It's unlikely, but he could be.

Considering he accused me of being an anti-semite because I support Israel...

And yet most of the jews that wanted their own homeland were secular so the ideological arguments fly out the window. But then, you honestly do not care for facts.they did not just want their own homeland. they wanted it in palestine. and the reasons why they wanted it there and no-where else are purely ideological.

WOW!!! Now this is signature worthy. That is one funny line What do you think an anti-semite is fool. You just showed yourself to be a dumb ass with this line.An anti-Semite is someone who is against Jews (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/anti-semite) And that's the only meaning of the word. It is in fact a misnomer, as it expresses something that is diametrically opposed to the word's literal meaning, since most Jews are not Semites and most Semites are not Jews..

Tell me: what have Arabs done to deserve to be punished with a foreign Jewish state in their home land? What?
Absolutely nothing, which still doesn't change what's actually occured.
Better to be anti-Semitic than to be against Semites.
Well since the Jews are as much a Semitic people as the Palestinians, that's kind of a strange 'argument', no?
If they had just wanted their own territory to be left alone, they would have accepted any offer.
Bollocks. Even beggars can be choosers, and they were probably well aware that they could do better than rebelling Kenya or terrain as friendly as a gulag in the USSR by simply rejecting those offers, because they had the media spotlight and the world's sympathy at the time.
But they wanted Palestine.
Some did. Some just didn't want a freezing cold or unbearably hot swamp, and when the Zionists got Palestine, they were pretty happy to go along with it.
They expected Palestine to be just waiting for the Jews to come and settle it, as if it were an empty land with no inhabitants.
Are you taking the piss?

I don't think anyone was imagining that to be the case, least of all the Jewish people moving into the area, which is why they bought land from people to start with, to try and reimburse the relatively small amount of people that were moved off the region.
The British were not supposed to give away anything over the heads of the area's inhabitants as they were only supposed to administer the area on behalf of the population until the population would find a modus of government.
Yes, well that's not actually what happened, and that's just the way it is, and if we were able to go back in time, I'm sure we'd sort something out, but now the people and places, as well as the circumstances, are wholly different.
To put the desire of Zionists over the needs of the population the UK was supposed to protect, was a crime and still is. But that error could still be corrected.
Bollocks.

Nearly everyone involved and alive at the time of the land being given to the refugees is dead, so giving people back the territory and putting the Jewish population, and those who have moved to Israel to god-knows-where is completely unrealistic and serves no actual purpose other than to piss off the Jewish population in the area.
In 1923 the territory of the Palestine mandate was divided and Transjordan was excluded from further discussions dealing with the 'Jewish National Home'. Prior to that Zionists had demanded the entire area of the mandate to become Eretz Israel.
Yeah, the Zionists might have. But the ration of Zionists to orthodox Jews is very low, and you need to keep that in mind before you start on your "grrr Jewish Zionists grrr CONSPIRACY IT NEVER HAPPENED" rubbish, to be fair.
If it's us-or-them then I'm on the side of the Palestinian Arabs and not on that of the immigrants/invaders.
Quick question - you ever been to Palestine or Israel? Ever?

Most people on both sides want peace, and I've spoken to plenty of Palestinians in person who say so.
The root of the entire Israel thing is Judaism, and the root of Judaism is the belief to be in a special relationship with a certain god, who chose them as 'his' people and who 'gave' them the land between the Jordan and the Mediterranean (and even more than that).
In some readings.

Many Jewish people are against Israel and Zionism in general, there have even been protests on the matter.
There was and is no reason ever to have a Jewish state in Palestine, except religion and what derived from it.
Other than a more western influence in an oil-rich area, which is exactly why the US is willing for them to do anything, and the Europe has thusfar mainly put up with its crap.

they did not just want their own homeland. they wanted it in palestine. and the reasons why they wanted it there and no-where else are purely ideological.

And yet most Jews support a two state solution and shared borders with Palestine. :eek:

Most Palestinians want the same thing with Israel :eek:

Ideology is not really the answer.

An anti-Semite is someone who is against Jews (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/anti-semite) And that's the only meaning of the word.

Look up what a semite is UB. It is obvious you have clue. Also if this definition were true then why the hell have you called me and others who supported Israel anti-semites?

And yet most Jews support a two state solution and shared borders with Palestine. :eek:

Most Palestinians want the same thing with Israel :eek:

Ideology is not really the answer.

It's testament to humanity that in a situation where the majority of people on both sides both want a similar resolution there is so much violence and trouble going on for so long. The devil appears to be in the details.

Basically, if you continue to piss people off by colonising their land, then they're going to get more desperate - ironically, since Hamas have taken power there have been far fewer suicide bombings than before, and that's in part due to Hamas becoming a more political institution but also because the Israelis aren't entirely interesting in pissing off an elected group of what some would term terrorists, seeing as they now have quite a lot of control.

They will get desperate, and they will seek whatever recourse they can find to end the colonization process. Taking into account the fact that physically attacking Israel would do more harm than good, they would realize that the only suitable course of action would be to lay down their arms, acknowledge Israel, and allow a harmonious two-state plan to be launched. Also, since Hamas came to power, there was a large-scale war resulting in the deaths of hundreds of Israelis -- not what I would call a decrease in the level of violence. That is what is to be expected when a terrorist organization gains political power in an extremist country; even members of the moderate Fatah movement were killed by Hamas radicals due to their more reasonable viewpoint.

Ok, well it's equally reasonable that Palestine demands the following:


That Israel ceases to exist, and all borders are opened.
The the IDF lays down its weapons.
That anti-Palestinian propaganda ceases to be shown.
That all those calling Hamas a terrorist movement be arrested.



They would have no legal basis whatsoever upon which to make that claim. The state of Israel was established under the auspices of the UN and with the consent of Great Britain, out of whose territory Israel was carved. Note that one of my points was not that Palestine cease to exist -- that is far too extremist for the time being, even though it is a dysfunctional country, unlike the prosperous Israel.
The IDF is a legitimate military institution, unlike Hamas, which is a terrorist organization. I feel that armed members of the Fatah movement should be given the right to retain their arms, because they have not engaged in such horrendous acts of terror as has Hamas. The same applies to the IDF.
Does Israel have a TV show featuring a Mickey Mouse look-alike who preaches the destruction of the Palestinian state and encourages young children to kill Palestinians? I think not.
My point in curtailing free speech was to prevent unnecessary bloodshed; I fail to see how refusing to acknowledge the truth would achieve that goal. You cannot support an extremist group which is avowed to the destruction of the Israeli state without imperiling the peace process, but ostracizing that group will promote peace.


When tyranny from a foreign power is the circumstance, then resistance is the answer.

Let's examine why there is "tyranny from a foreign power," as you put it, in the first place. Perhaps it's because the Arabs decided to declare war on Israel in order to wipe it off the face of the map time and time again. Israel tried defending itself, but the Arabs would just sign a peace accord when they were losing and then recuperate, build up their army, and try again. Eventually, Israel realized that it needed to put a stop to this heinous behavior. And now, Israel has even withdrawn most of its troops from the Gaza Strip and the West Bank; still, the Hamas movement persists in its ghastly ways. It would not be ridiculous to suggest that Israel simply annex those two areas in order to prevent such violence, but I would not go so far. However, Hamas is clearly pushing it; to even suggest that such a gruesome movement is "the answer" is beyond absurd. Until the Arabs accept the Israeli state, there can be no "answers" and Hamas is a deadly obstacle to progress. Israel has learned the lessons of the past; if it withdraws from the Occupied Territories completely, then Hamas will gain in power and prestige and attack Israel again, only harder. This has happened over and over in Israel's history. Make no mistake: it will happen again.

Let us end this thread simply.

1. East Jerusalem settlements probably a bad idea.

2. Two State solution good.

3. Politicians and Politics suck.

The rest is all semantics.

... They would have no legal basis whatsoever upon which to make that claim. The state of Israel was established under the auspices of the UN and with the consent of Great Britain, out of whose territory Israel was carved....Complete horseshit. Palestine was not British territory. It was Arab territory administered by Britain on behalf of the Arabs after the downfall of the Ottoman Empire. And the British, as usual, abused their power to deal with Palestine as if it were one of their colonies. Britain's consent is of no relevance whatsoever. What they would have needed was the consent of the population actually living in the area at issue. Every single step from the Balfour declaration up to the UN division plan for (or rather against) Palestine and the subsequent creation of Israel was undemocratic and in violation of the Arabs' right to self-determination.

2. Two State solution good.
...
The rest is all semantics.What is your suggestion for the borders of these Two-State-Solution? This is not just semantics, it's the essential question. Under whose rule and conditions will Palestinian Arabs have to live?

I will be happy to clarify.

What I propose is that they get the Gaza Strip and most of the West Bank (not including Jerusalem). The Israelis can keep a few areas of the West Bank - areas that are inhabited by Jewish settlers and not Arabs - in return for giving the Palestinians a few bits of Israel that are inhabited by Arabs. I believe that an Israeli MP recently suggested this kind of land swap. Exactly what parts of the West Bank the Israelis keep should be determined by negotiations.

It may come out that the Palestinians will only part with Jerusalem if they get every last square inch of the West Bank outside Jerusalem. If that were the case, then I would be OK with giving them that for the sake of peace. However, it might be fair for them to foot some of the expenses of forcibly evacuating settlers from the West Bank - pulling out of the West Bank will be slightly more painful for Israel than having your genitals operated on without anesthesia, so the Palestinians should do what they can to ease the peace process along.

Why not Jerusalem? Because dividing a city never works out well, and Israel has its capital - including all the major government infrastructure - in West Jerusalem. The city is majority Jewish. The Muslims can and do administer their holy sites. The current setup is fine.

Would you draw a map?
And why would you have Palestinians pay for the removal of Jewish settlers from the West Bank? They did not put these colonists there.

pdf map (http://www.btselem.org/Download/Separation_Barrier_Map_Eng.pdf)

Are you out to destroy support for the Palestinian cause?

Are you out to destroy support for the Palestinian cause?What are you out for? The minimal solution for Palestinians? To cede everything? To just give in to the military power of the Israelis? Palestinians have already officially given up 78% of what was once Palestine, and Israel still wants more? What is the Palestinian cause in your eyes? To just let the Israelis take the territory they have illegally colonized inside the West Bank? You know how this works: they put their settlers in and then they say 'oh, there are no Palestinians living here, let's annex it to Israel'. And step by step they will be expanding their settlements and then claim the area between the settlements to create a closed territory for further annexation. What was this thread about? Further colonization. And you know that Israel will not stop this policy.
As long as Israelis do not accept the Green Line as their permanent border, they can all go straight to hell completely.

What is your suggestion for the borders of these Two-State-Solution? This is not just semantics, it's the essential question. Under whose rule and conditions will Palestinian Arabs have to live?

Would you draw a map?
And why would you have Palestinians pay for the removal of Jewish settlers from the West Bank? They did not put these colonists there.

pdf map (http://www.btselem.org/Download/Separation_Barrier_Map_Eng.pdf)

I've tried to not argue with you because I don't like to lower my intellegence to argue with idiots but it looks like I have too which is very very very VERY unfortunate.

Here are the borders: all of Gaza plus 95-98% of the West Bank with connenction to other Palestinian settlements in Jerusalem and elsewhere. No right of return, no East Jerusalem plus Israel pays reperations for all settlements inside the West Bank and Gaza and finally Israel guarantees help to give infrastructure to Palestinian economy so that it can grow. From these territories the Palestinians will be given 100% complete autonomy to run their own affairs however they see fit. Other things that come with independence will also be thrown in (i.e. 100% IDF pullout, all settlers leave and never return, etc.)

Not 100% what either side want but a fair deal.

Now you sir advocate genocide, the increase of terror, possibly nuclear war (Israel responds to the Palestinian through nukes) and definitely some type of Middle Eastern War (Syria, Iran, and Egypt support Palestinians vs. Israel and Jordan) which could turn nuclear. Why you want to advocate that is beyond me. Most people in this debate understand the ideas of cause and effect and aren't blind followers of one side or the other.

I'm a moderate, in my mind, when it comes to the Israel-Palestine question as I'm willing and able to say "Oh yeh Israel has done some wrong, on balance they are better but they aren't perfect" but in comparison to some people on this forum, who are much more moderate and articulate, end up looking like a giant douche and a crazy pro-Israel advocate.

You on the other hand are a blind follower of the Palestinians who overlook all their wrong doings as "Justice" for the eviction of land. You're reasoning means that anybody who was evicted by a bank for not paying has rights to bomb that bank and kill the innocent civilians of that bank. Society cannot function with that type of vigilantee justice yet you don't care and are more than willing to do that type of stuff.

That's why everybody hates you in this debate even those like Nodinia who should be supporting your views as s/he is a pro-Palestinian advocate who while I don't agree with his/her opinion I respect it as it's moderate.

Final thought: That map of the wall that you posted, it's from an Israeli website. Which means they allow for desent something that would never happen with the Palestinians.

What are you out for?

A Palestinian state incorporating Arab East Jerusalem, Gaza, and the vast Majority of the West Bank. I also support armed struggle towards those ends and have never made any bones about it.

A Palestinian state incorporating Arab East Jerusalem, Gaza, and the vast Majority of the West Bank. I also support armed struggle towards those ends and have never made any bones about it.1. What does "vast majority of the West Bank" mean exactly? Why not the territory defined by the Green Line?
2. Since you support armed struggle towards Palestinian statehood, what is your suggestion in the currents situation? It is pretty clear that Israel has no interest in a Palestinian state or anything that would remove the settlers (=voters) from the West Bank. So far we have only had offers of "autonomy", which practically means annexation without giving the population citizenship (in other words: apartheid). And the refugee issue has not been addressed at all.
We both know that since Netanjahu was elected PM the "peace process" has been dead completely. So what is your suggestion, really?

So what is your suggestion, really?

Well, as you asked - "Fuck off with yourself and never comment on a middle east related thread again".

*snip*

The Jews came to Palestine with the fixed aim to create a state in an already populated area. You still fail to see that what is now named Israel created the mess in the first place. The guilt is theirs alone. All that Arabs ever did was react. To British imperialism and to Jewish pride and desire for statehood, which both are evil things.
What does "moderate" really mean? To let the Israelis proceed with stealing land? Or let the Israelis proceed with putting their most orthodox nutjobs into the West Bank as the spearhead against the Palestinians? Why is 78% of what was once Palestine not enough? Since Israelis have always been just taking and taking, it is the Palestinians' natural right to fight this aggression with all means available.

If the Mexican immigrants who have come into the US ever decided to create a state withing US territory, how should the US react? If the UN decided to slice out an area and give it to the immigrants without ever asking the population living in the area in question? Wouldn't that be an injustice? And remain an injustice forever?

Well, as you asked - "Fuck off with yourself and never comment on a middle east related thread again".Oh, and that will free the Palestinians? You are so very supportive of the Palestinians, I must say. You are such a true hero. But unfortunately with your "moderate" way of supporting Palestine, Palestine will be gone completely pretty soon. It takes more drastic measures to stop Israel from its policy of gradual colonization, because Israel will never stop the land grab by itself. Haven't you learned anything in the past 30 years?

It's testament to humanity that in a situation where the majority of people on both sides both want a similar resolution there is so much violence and trouble going on for so long. The devil appears to be in the details.

That and the people in power. Civilians on both sides of this struggle want it to end. The people in power however, do not care what the people want.

Complete horseshit. Palestine was not British territory.

Oh please stop. This hurts my sides from laughing.

Are you out to destroy support for the Palestinian cause?

Of course he is. He's a troll. He has no clue what the fuck he is talking about.

I've tried to not argue with you because I don't like to lower my intellegence to argue with idiots but it looks like I have too which is very very very VERY unfortunate.

Here are the borders: all of Gaza plus 95-98% of the West Bank with connenction to other Palestinian settlements in Jerusalem and elsewhere. No right of return, no East Jerusalem plus Israel pays reperations for all settlements inside the West Bank and Gaza and finally Israel guarantees help to give infrastructure to Palestinian economy so that it can grow. From these territories the Palestinians will be given 100% complete autonomy to run their own affairs however they see fit. Other things that come with independence will also be thrown in (i.e. 100% IDF pullout, all settlers leave and never return, etc.)

Not 100% what either side want but a fair deal.

I'd agree to that.

Now you sir advocate genocide, the increase of terror, possibly nuclear war (Israel responds to the Palestinian through nukes) and definitely some type of Middle Eastern War (Syria, Iran, and Egypt support Palestinians vs. Israel and Jordan) which could turn nuclear. Why you want to advocate that is beyond me. Most people in this debate understand the ideas of cause and effect and aren't blind followers of one side or the other.

Well said my friend.

I'm a moderate, in my mind, when it comes to the Israel-Palestine question as I'm willing and able to say "Oh yeh Israel has done some wrong, on balance they are better but they aren't perfect" but in comparison to some people on this forum, who are much more moderate and articulate, end up looking like a giant douche and a crazy pro-Israel advocate.

Sad but true fact of life in these debates with UB.

You on the other hand are a blind follower of the Palestinians who overlook all their wrong doings as "Justice" for the eviction of land. You're reasoning means that anybody who was evicted by a bank for not paying has rights to bomb that bank and kill the innocent civilians of that bank. Society cannot function with that type of vigilantee justice yet you don't care and are more than willing to do that type of stuff.

Careful that you do not use big words. He will not understand them.

That's why everybody hates you in this debate even those like Nodinia who should be supporting your views as s/he is a pro-Palestinian advocate who while I don't agree with his/her opinion I respect it as it's moderate.

Likewise

Final thought: That map of the wall that you posted, it's from an Israeli website. Which means they allow for desent something that would never happen with the Palestinians.

hehe! Busted.

Oh, and that will free the Palestinians? You are so very supportive of the Palestinians, I must say. You are such a true hero. But unfortunately with your "moderate" way of supporting Palestine, Palestine will be gone completely pretty soon. It takes more drastic measures to stop Israel from its policy of gradual colonization, because Israel will never stop the land grab by itself. Haven't you learned anything in the past 30 years?

Grow the hell up and stop being a troll.

Oh, and that will free the Palestinians? You are so very supportive of the Palestinians, I must say. You are such a true hero. But unfortunately with your "moderate" way of supporting Palestine, Palestine will be gone completely pretty soon. It takes more drastic measures to stop Israel from its policy of gradual colonization, because Israel will never stop the land grab by itself. Haven't you learned anything in the past 30 years?
*head into wall*

Bloody hell. I'm generally quite pro-Palestine, but you are bringing out support for bloody Israel from me - instead of ranting about The Jews and claiming that somehow, all things can be repaired and the Palestinians' crimes can be forgotten, whereas the Israelis will be lobbed off the Golan Heights for their evildoing ways, why not listen to people actually from the two areas?

If you'd ever spoken to a Palestinian, you'd probably learn that they're in a really crappy situation, but they know that violence isn't really the way forward, dialogue needs to take place.

Most Israelis are also desiring the same thing - a two state, peaceful solution, that gets people like Hamas and Olmert out of power, and means that people don't all have to do National Service and reservists don't have to fight proxy wars in Lebanon, and they can stay home with their families.

Don't let your unnecessary hatred of a situation you have no hope of remedying, that's been going on for thousands of years blind you to what people actually want in the area.

*head into wall*

Bloody hell. I'm generally quite pro-Palestine, but you are bringing out support for bloody Israel from me - instead of ranting about The Jews and claiming that somehow, all things can be repaired and the Palestinians' crimes can be forgotten, whereas the Israelis will be lobbed of the Golan Heights for their evildoing ways, why not listen to people actually from the two areas?

If you'd ever spoken to a Palestinian, you'd probably learn that they're in a really crappy situation, but they know that violence isn't really the way forward, dialogue needs to take place.

Most Israelis are also desiring the same thing - a two state, peaceful solution, that gets people like Hamas and Olmert out of power, and means that people don't all have to do National Service and reservists don't have to fight proxy wars in Lebanon, and they can stay home with their families.

Don't let your unnecessary hatred of a situation you have no hope of remedying, that's been going on for thousands of years blind you to what people actually want in the area.

*stands up and applauds*

Well said Yootopia. Have a cookie

*head into wall*

Bloody hell. I'm generally quite pro-Palestine, but you are bringing out support for bloody Israel from me - instead of ranting about The Jews and claiming that somehow, all things can be repaired and the Palestinians' crimes can be forgotten, whereas the Israelis will be lobbed of the Golan Heights for their evildoing ways, why not listen to people actually from the two areas?

If you'd ever spoken to a Palestinian, you'd probably learn that they're in a really crappy situation, but they know that violence isn't really the way forward, dialogue needs to take place.

Most Israelis are also desiring the same thing - a two state, peaceful solution, that gets people like Hamas and Olmert out of power, and means that people don't all have to do National Service and reservists don't have to fight proxy wars in Lebanon, and they can stay home with their families.

Don't let your unnecessary hatred of a situation you have no hope of remedying, that's been going on for thousands of years blind you to what people actually want in the area.

If the Israelis wanted peace, they'd elect different governments. And what dialog are you talking about? The dialog that follows announcements such as the one this thread is about? They are expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank. And in a few months or a year they will do it again. And after a few moths or another year they will do it again. And so on and so on. Are you really so blind not to see what is really going on there?

If the Israelis wanted peace, they'd elect different governments. And what dialog are you talking about? The dialog that follows announcements such as the one this thread is about? They are expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank. And in a few months or a year they will do it again. And after a few moths or another year they will do it again. And so on and so on. Are you really so blind not to see what is really going on there?

Hey! Maybe when the terrorist groups stop sending in suicide bombers and launching rocket attacks into the heart of Israel, maybe none of this would be happening. Did that ever cross that little brain of yours?

Hey! Maybe when the terrorist groups stop sending in suicide bombers and launching rocket attacks into the heart of Israel, maybe none of this would be happening. Did that ever cross that little brain of yours?The cause for suicide bombers and launching rocket attacks into the heart of Israel is the occupation of the West Bank and the military control Israel holds over the Gaza and the Golan heights. If Israel removes the cause, the effect will be removed as well. But instead, Israel chooses to increase the provocation.

Does this Arab insistance that their territories must be completely free of Jews disturb anyone else?

And does anyone else not think that if the Arabs can't tolerate the presence of Jews, they're not going to be geniune about peace?

Israel DID NOT EXIST before 1948, so they are taking over Palestinian land and annexing them...It's like if the Chinese or Russians came and took over your country and started deporting you and building settlements there...

The cause for suicide bombers and launching rocket attacks into the heart of Israel is the occupation of the West Bank and the military control Israel holds over the Gaza and the Golan heights.

In case ya missed it, the IDF completely pulled out of Gaza. The minute they did, Hamas and Fatah began to kill eachother. Killing innocent people is no way to fight an occupation. It is just going to make matters worse. When Hamas finally realizes that they will gain nothing from such attacks, things will begin to straighten out.

If Israel removes the cause, the effect will be removed as well. But instead, Israel chooses to increase the provocation.

I do not blame them considering that the P.A. is incapable of actually stopping terrorist groups from sabatoging peace.

If the Israelis wanted peace, they'd elect different governments.
What the hell can they do - all of the parties are nationalistic and fairly militaristic, and the only real choice is how much tax compared to various socialist measures you want to vote for.

Asking for a different kind of party is like asking the Green party to win in the US.
And what dialog are you talking about? The dialog that follows announcements such as the one this thread is about? They are expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank. And in a few months or a year they will do it again. And after a few moths or another year they will do it again. And so on and so on. Are you really so blind not to see what is really going on there?
Neither side is willing to compromise. That's the problem.

If the Palestinians mediate through Fatah, and Israel goes through Lakk'ud (?) then things are going to work a lot better, because there'll be the two more moderate parties in popular politics.

In case ya missed it, the IDF completely pulled out of Gaza. The minute they did, Hamas and Fatah began to kill eachother. Killing innocent people is no way to fight an occupation. It is just going to make matters worse. When Hamas finally realizes that they will gain nothing from such attacks, things will begin to straighten out.Israel still holds sovereignty over Gaza. It still controls the air space and access by sea.

I do not blame them considering that the P.A. is incapable of actually stopping terrorist groups from sabatoging peace.What peace? And through what means should the P.A. do anything?

The Jews came to Palestine with the fixed aim to create a state in an already populated area. You still fail to see that what is now named Israel created the mess in the first place. The guilt is theirs alone. All that Arabs ever did was react. To British imperialism and to Jewish pride and desire for statehood, which both are evil things.
What does "moderate" really mean? To let the Israelis proceed with stealing land? Or let the Israelis proceed with putting their most orthodox nutjobs into the West Bank as the spearhead against the Palestinians? Why is 78% of what was once Palestine not enough? Since Israelis have always been just taking and taking, it is the Palestinians' natural right to fight this aggression with all means available.

If the Mexican immigrants who have come into the US ever decided to create a state withing US territory, how should the US react? If the UN decided to slice out an area and give it to the immigrants without ever asking the population living in the area in question? Wouldn't that be an injustice? And remain an injustice forever?

US already took up Mexico in the 1850s with California, New Mexico, Arizona, and several other states so I would call it justice for the US occupation of Mexican land. Or at least I'm sure you would considering you're logic on these issues. That's right! I just turned your argument have fun now.

Yes the Jews wanted a state. They didn't want another holocaust, Spanish Inquisition, expulsion from another European country, or pogrom. That's a legitimate reason to want a state. In order for them to create a state they had to get an area that was probably populated considering that all the habitable world is populated at this time (late 1800s), they chose the ancient homeland of Israel.

Israel was not a good land to choose at this time considering it was mostly swamp or desert so the Jews bought the worst land from the Arabs and built it up creating cities and farms. The Arabs didn't like the Jewish presence there so they fought them from 1920 massacres to 1948 when 5! armies descended upon Israel to destroy the Jews and "Force them to the sea." The Jews defended themselves and managed to win the conflict by not being driven to the sea.

In 1947 the UN partition plan gave Jews lands that were not owned by Jews. However, most of these lands were not owned by Palestinians either. Most of the lands were desert in the Negev, a bunch of sand. Nobody wants to live in a place without water where you can't grow anything but the Jews took it anyway.

Between 1948 and 1967 Israel was a constant battleground as terrorists and other no gooders from across the Arab world tried to destroy them. The Jews again survived until 1967 when for the second time Nassar close the Straights of Tehran.

Israel realizing a war was imminant (sp?) and wanting to make sure it still had it's southern shipping roots invaded Egypt and destroyed their entire air force on the ground. From there one of the most one sided conflicts in history started as Israel captured the Sinai desert, Gaza strip, West Bank, all of Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights from Syria, Egypt and Jordan. After the War David Ben Gurion said that Israel should give back all the land except Jerusalem to the Arabs, unfortunately Israel didn't follow his advice.

Oh and might makes right still is how international law works. Do we condemn North Vietnam's takeover of South Vietnam? NO! Do we condemn China's take over of Tibet? NO! Do we condemn Ethiopia's involvement in Somalia? NO! Do we condemn the US' involvment in Iraq in terms of tackling Saddam Hussein? NO! (people support Hussein out of power they don't support the continued loss of life now) Do we condemn Morroco's takeover of Western Sahara? NO! So then why is Israel uniquely condemned? Easy because the world hates Israel. Give me one other example of a war after WWII where we condemn the victors because they conquered territory besides Israel.

More years of war with the Egyptians followed and in 1973 Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan engaged on a suprise on the MOST HOLY DAY OF THE YEAR for Jews in 1973. This is like Israel purposely invading the Palestinians on the most holy day of Ramadan but Israel doesn't do that because they are moral. Despite brutal and bloody losses near the beginning Israel gained back territory and won the war not surrending an inch of land.

In 1978 peace was signed between Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat giving Egypt the Sinai, Israel also wanted to give Egypt Gaza but Egypt didn't take it. This peace still lasts today.

Throughout the 1980s Israel went into south Lebanon trying to find terrorists who were hitting Israeli targets with missiles. They failed and created animosity with Arabs. Also during this time the first intifada started as Palestinians became fed up with the lack of official support and took things into their own hands. The uprising coupled with the harsh Israeli response led many to not like Israel as much and is the root cause of this mess today.

That's all I have time for. Now I would like to see somebody on the other side make an in depth historical analysis of the whole situation.

What the hell can they do - all of the parties are nationalistic and fairly militaristic, and the only real choice is how much tax compared to various socialist measures you want to vote for.

Asking for a different kind of party is like asking the Green party to win in the US.To sum it up: Israelis do not want peace.

Neither side is willing to compromise. That's the problem.

If the Palestinians mediate through Fatah, and Israel goes through Lakk'ud (?) then things are going to work a lot better, because there'll be the two more moderate parties in popular politics.The Palestinians have nothing to make compromises about, they have already given up all they could. Why the fuck can't Israel be content with 78% of what was Palestine once? Why? Why the expansion? Why do they always want more?
What do you expect the Palestinian side to do when there is obviously not enough decency in Israel to stop the occupation? Israel is the intruder and the reason for the mess in the region. Israel must show its readiness for peace and make a first move. But a significant move, not the alibi shit of the past 10 years.

And what party do you mean? ליכוד Likud? The charter of which calls for the annexation and settlement of the entire 'Land of Israel', which in their view comprises of the current territory of the State of Israel, as well as West Bank, the Gaza Strip, the Golan Heights, and the whole of Jerusalem?

What peace? And through what means should the P.A. do anything?

Ever hear of Gandhi and peaceful protesting?

Ever hear of Gandhi and peaceful protesting?Very funny. What did he achieve? Civil war and the division of India.
And Israelis would view peaceful protesting only as an invitation to further land grab.

Very funny. What did he achieve? Civil war and the division of India.

How about a free country? Oh I guess you do want to overlook that part. He gained alot through peaceful protest. When the Palestinians start to do that, then they will gain more sympathy in the eyes of the world.

And Israelis would view peaceful protesting only as an invitation to further land grab.

Now if you can back that up little troll...

EDIT: And if they do try to do that, support for Israel will plummet.

How about a free country? Oh I guess you do want to overlook that part. He gained alot through peaceful protest. When the Palestinians start to do that, then they will gain more sympathy in the eyes of the world.In what way is Palestine today comparable to India back then?

Now if you can back that up little troll...Well, so far nothing has kept Israel from expanding its settlements. Nothing would accelerate this process more than Palestinians stopping resistance.

EDIT: And if they do try to do that, support for Israel will plummet.When has Israel ever cared about that?

In what way is Palestine today comparable to India back then?

If I truly have to answer that then you really are stupid.

Well, so far nothing has kept Israel from expanding its settlements. Nothing would accelerate this process more than Palestinians stopping resistance.

And when Palestine stops resisting and the Israelis continue to harm them in ways we have seen on the TV, you do not think that things will go very badly for Israel? It will be a PR disaster.

When has Israel ever cared about that?

Oh they will, especially when support from the US begins to drop.

If I truly have to answer that then you really are stupid.In other words: you don't know.

And when Palestine stops resisting and the Israelis continue to harm them in ways we have seen on the TV, you do not think that things will go very badly for Israel? It will be a PR disaster. And since when does Israel give a shit about anybody else's opinions? Or for PR disasters? Cf the recent Lebanon war.

Oh they will, especially when support from the US begins to drop.So far Israel has always had the (political) support of the US. I don't think that will change, no matter what Israel does. And even without US support Israel would keep to its policies. After all, Israel is constantly bragging about how independent it is.

In other words: you don't know.

:rolleyes:

And since when does Israel give a shit about anybody else's opinions? Or for PR disasters? Cf the recent Lebanon war.

And yet, with international pressure, they stopped their war. With international pressure, they left Lebanon in 2000.

So far Israel has always had the (political) support of the US. I don't think that will change, no matter what Israel does. And even without US support Israel would keep to its policies. After all, Israel is constantly bragging about how independent it is.

And just how bad do you think things will get when they begin to abuse people who are not attacking them back? You think they can actually survive if embargoes go up and resolutions actually get passed stopping things from entering Israel?

:rolleyes:In other words: you still don't know.

And yet, with international pressure, they stopped their war. With international pressure, they left Lebanon in 2000. What makes you think that international pressure had anything to do with this?

And just how bad do you think things will get when they begin to abuse people who are not attacking them back? You think they can actually survive if embargoes go up and resolutions actually get passed stopping things from entering Israel?It is very unlikely that any sanctions would ever be implemented against Israel in the case of wrong-doing. There have been none thus far. And the holocaust bonus is only slowly fading away...

Oh and might makes right still is how international law works. Do we condemn North Vietnam's takeover of South Vietnam? NO! Do we condemn China's take over of Tibet? NO! Do we condemn Ethiopia's involvement in Somalia? NO! Do we condemn the US' involvment in Iraq in terms of tackling Saddam Hussein? NO! (people support Hussein out of power they don't support the continued loss of life now) Do we condemn Morroco's takeover of Western Sahara? NO! So then why is Israel uniquely condemned? Easy because the world hates Israel. Give me one other example of a war after WWII where we condemn the victors because they conquered territory besides Israel.
Erm, I've heard a lot of people condemning those topics. It's not that the world hates Israel, it's that the Israel-Palestine thing has been rumbling for years, and is the most well known.


More years of war with the Egyptians followed and in 1973 Egypt, Syria, Lebanon and Jordan engaged on a suprise on the MOST HOLY DAY OF THE YEAR for Jews in 1973. This is like Israel purposely invading the Palestinians on the most holy day of Ramadan but Israel doesn't do that because they are moral. Despite brutal and bloody losses near the beginning Israel gained back territory and won the war not surrending an inch of land.
I'd hardly say moral. They just exercise their control all year round.


In 1978 peace was signed between Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat giving Egypt the Sinai, Israel also wanted to give Egypt Gaza but Egypt didn't take it. This peace still lasts today.

Throughout the 1980s Israel went into south Lebanon trying to find terrorists who were hitting Israeli targets with missiles. They failed and created animosity with Arabs. Also during this time the first intifada started as Palestinians became fed up with the lack of official support and took things into their own hands. The uprising coupled with the harsh Israeli response led many to not like Israel as much and is the root cause of this mess today.

That's all I have time for. Now I would like to see somebody on the other side make an in depth historical analysis of the whole situation.

I won't do in-depth but I'll summarise for the hell of it.

Back in WWI the British effectively promised both sides that we'd help them gain a state on the same bit of land.

For the next decade or so Jews immigrated to Palestine, mainly on the zionist belief the Jews had a right to live in Israel on historical/religious grounds.

From 1936-39 the Arab lower classes felt they were being margianlised and there were non-violent strikes and protests acts of violence targeting British military personnel, Jewish civilians, and other Arabs in the upper classes. These riots were nationalistic in nature, but not specifically against the Jews.

British Gov proposes 2 state solution.

During and after the War the British gov attempted to control the country by forbidding further immigration of European Jews, zionist leaders decided to ignore this and illegally smuggled around 70,000 into the country.

1947 UN partition plan introduced, partially accepted by the Jews and rejected by the Palestinians.

Late 47 Arab "irregulars" start ambushing travelling Jews and convoys, retaliatory attacks carried out by Jewish underground groups.

April 48 Zionist forces aimed to take control of the state of Israel as stated in the UN Partition Plan, and other Jewish settlements, states and roads leading to them - effectively calling for the annexation of much of Palestine.

UK terminated its mandate shortly after and in response to the above the Arab states attacked, but the better trained and armed Israeli army defeated them.

Armistice Agreements left 78% of Palestine outside Israeli control, but both sides disagreed about repatriation agreements leading to large refugee camps set up.


In 1967 Egypt exercised its right to close the straits of Tiran, and started mobilising forces (whether to invade Israel or in preparation for an expected Israeli invasion given the limited viability of Israel with the straits closed is unclear).

June 1967 Israel attacks Egypt and six-day war commenced. Ending with Israel controlling all of the land previously under British Mandate.

1970s generally contained violence, and an effective guerilla war with first rise of real civilian aimed attacks by Arab side, neither side recognised the other as legitimate.

1982 invasion of Lebanon in response to above attacks.

IDF complicit in Shabra and Shatila massacre, later declared by UN general assembly as an act of genocide.

1987 First Infitada, spontaneous uprising to protest lack of Palestinian state, put down forcefully by IDF (using live fire on demonstrators) UN Security Council condemned Israel's handling of it.

1993 Oslo accords, Arafat recognises Israel. Israel cedes some control over part of Palestinian Lands. Rebin shot probably for supporting peace process.

Likud Politician with complicated name elected. Oslo accords stall.


All I can be bothered to do. Almost all paraphrased from wiki.

This isn't surprising in the least. The Zionists have been ignoring all agreements they have made to not build more settlements, these as well as those in the West Bank.

The extremist Zionists who volunteer for these settlements are for the most part religious extremists who believe in a 'Greater Israel' and the subjugation of Galilee, yada yada, they attack West Bank Palestinians, mostly spitting on and mutilating people, and dob people in to be bashed by the IDF guards while waiting for hours in the sun just to go home. This Zionist minority is like the 2% approval rating Olmert has now.

UK terminated its mandate shortly after and in response to the above the Arab states attacked, but the better trained and armed Israeli army defeated them.


Only part I really disagree outside of the fact that you couldn't find another example furthering my point

What army? Israel didn't have an army. All it had were 3 unorganized underground groups with barely any guns, no tanks, airplanes or anything like that.

All the Arab armies had tanks, airplanes, big guns and other things. It was like the colonists during the American Revolution they were lucky.

We can measure how much sincere effort the Prime Ministers of Israel and Palestine are putting into negotiating a peace plan by how badly their own constituency want to kill them.

In other words: you still don't know.

Oh I know but if I explained it to you, it will fly over your head. If you cannot figure out the parallels between british occupied India and Israeli occupied West Bank, it just shows your lack of intellect.

What makes you think that international pressure had anything to do with this?

What makes you think it didn't?

It is very unlikely that any sanctions would ever be implemented against Israel in the case of wrong-doing. There have been none thus far. And the holocaust bonus is only slowly fading away...

:rolleyes:

We can measure how much sincere effort the Prime Ministers of Israel and Palestine are putting into negotiating a peace plan by how badly their own constituency want to kill them.

There is some truth to that.

There is some truth to that.

Why do you hate Japanese people!?!!:mad:

Only part I really disagree outside of the fact that you couldn't find another example furthering my point

What army? Israel didn't have an army. All it had were 3 unorganized underground groups with barely any guns, no tanks, airplanes or anything like that.

All the Arab armies had tanks, airplanes, big guns and other things. It was like the colonists during the American Revolution they were lucky.

Well, off the top of my head, Korean War, Vietnam War, Kuwait, countries condemned and tried to prevent other countries from invading other countries.

*shrugs* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_war#Military_assessments
The Arab armies were barely worthy of the name, only Egypt had tanks, only 3 had planes, and much of the armies' were untrained and inexperienced. From the outset the Israeli generals ranked their chances about 50-50, it wasn't the Thermopylae-like miracle it's sometimes portrayed as.

Interesting example, given the colonists were backed by the French, Dutch and Spanish, the greatest military powers in the world (after Britain).

Well, off the top of my head, Korean War, Vietnam War, Kuwait, countries condemned and tried to prevent other countries from invading other countries.

Korean was only because of the Cold War and Kuwait, well you got me there. Maybe Israel is lucky it hasn't been invaded by US led UN forces.


*shrugs* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab-Israeli_war#Military_assessments
The Arab armies were barely worthy of the name, only Egypt had tanks, only 3 had planes, and much of the armies' were untrained and inexperienced. From the outset the Israeli generals ranked their chances about 50-50, it wasn't the Thermopylae-like miracle it's sometimes portrayed as.



Actually if you read the whole article Israel was outnumbered the entire time.

First it was 29,677 vs. 31,250 (about) with the 31000 (Arab) having 204 planes and 3 armoured battalions with 115 extra artillery pieces. The Israelis had no and i quote from the wiki "Initially, the Haganah had no heavy machine guns, artillery, armoured vehicles, anti-tank or anti-aircraft weapons." meaning that the Arabs should rule the day based on aircraft and tanks alone.

OK, so I go offline for 20 hours, and look what happens.

To answer UB's last request directed at me, drawing a map would require time and energy. To describe the maximum I am willing to give the Palestinians, just take a map of Israel/Palestine. Color the West Bank and Gaza green. Color Israel proper, Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights blue.

The green is Palestine. The blue is Israel.

And why the Palestinians should help pay to evacuate the settlers? You do not realize how difficult it was for Israel to forcibly remove the settlers from Gaza - they had to, quite literally, be dragged kicking and screaming from their homes. There were fears of civil war. The West Bank will be a thousand times harder. It seems that in order for the peace process to go ahead properly, the Palestinians should help out.

On second thought, scrap that. The Palestinians should play no part in the withdrawal from the West Bank. That might provoke an armed response by the settlers... which could throw the country into a civil war.

As for the Golan, the Palestinians have never claimed it. The only people who seriously dispute the Israeli claim are the Syrians, who are still technically at war with Israel, and do not recognize Israel.

Well, I (personally) want Israel to completely annex the West Bank, Gaza, and the Golan, and let the Arab refugees return and then make all these Arabs Israeli citizens. One state, and all will be fine.

Palasael/Palasrael!

OK, so I go offline for 20 hours, and look what happens.

To answer UB's last request directed at me, drawing a map would require time and energy. To describe the maximum I am willing to give the Palestinians, just take a map of Israel/Palestine. Color the West Bank and Gaza green. Color Israel proper, Jerusalem, and the Golan Heights blue.

The green is Palestine. The blue is Israel.So you do support the Green Line as the border?

And why the Palestinians should help pay to evacuate the settlers? You do not realize how difficult it was for Israel to forcibly remove the settlers from Gaza - they had to, quite literally, be dragged kicking and screaming from their homes. There were fears of civil war. The West Bank will be a thousand times harder. It seems that in order for the peace process to go ahead properly, the Palestinians should help out.

On second thought, scrap that. The Palestinians should play no part in the withdrawal from the West Bank. That might provoke an armed response by the settlers... which could throw the country into a civil war.Of course, Israel must pull out the settlers by itself. After all, it also put them into the West Bank without Palestinian help.

As for the Golan, the Palestinians have never claimed it. The only people who seriously dispute the Israeli claim are the Syrians, who are still technically at war with Israel, and do not recognize Israel.The circumstance that Palestinians do not claim the Golan heights does not change that fact that the area is illegally occupied by Israel. The UN at least does not recognize that occupation or annexation.

Ever hear of Gandhi and peaceful protesting?

Yeah, that'll work...
“Thanks to the media here for telling the truth…Bring this truth to whatever country you come from!”

These were Mairead Maguire’s words, a Nobel Peace Prize winner from Northern Ireland, just one hour before she was shot with a rubber-coated steel bullet by Israeli Occupation Forces.
http://www.palsolidarity.org/main/2007/04/21/april-20-bilin-protest/

RAFAH, Gaza Strip, May 19 -- An Israeli helicopter gunship and a tank fired rockets and artillery shells at Palestinian protesters Wednesday as they marched toward a heavily populated neighborhood in the southern Gaza Strip. At least 10 Palestinians were killed and dozens wounded, many of them children, as explosives and shrapnel ripped through the crowd.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38959-2004May19.html


You do not realize how difficult it was for Israel to forcibly remove the settlers from Gaza - they had to, quite literally, be dragged kicking and screaming from their homes.

Well, they managed to drive out enough palestinians...and they've been keeping in practice for the last 40 years. I know theres cultural differences between the two communities but I imagine being given 30 minutes to clear out before a bulldozer demolishes your house is sauce that can suit geese of all genders.

Oh I know but if I explained it to you, it will fly over your head. If you cannot figure out the parallels between british occupied India and Israeli occupied West Bank, it just shows your lack of intellect.


Colonialist and Racist in nature. However the Brits, as is the way with Empires, incorporated the "natives" help oppress their fellows. The Palestinians have managed to avoid being pushed into this outright so far.

Wow - we agree on something. And this, of all things.

Ever hear of Gandhi and peaceful protesting?

That worked because the British weren't quite up to the task of abandoning human decency.

The IDF has no qualms about using human shields, executing fleeing, unarmed, 4 year olds and shelling civilians.

Gandhi in Israel would probably end up with Gandhi being shot by some overzealous IDF butcher who would later get a medal for it.

That worked because the British weren't quite up to the task of abandoning human decency.

The IDF has no qualms about using human shields, executing fleeing, unarmed, 4 year olds and shelling civilians.

Gandhi in Israel would probably end up with Gandhi being shot by some overzealous IDF butcher who would later get a medal for it.or end up like Rabin

That worked because the British weren't quite up to the task of abandoning human decency.

The IDF has no qualms about using human shields, executing fleeing, unarmed, 4 year olds and shelling civilians.

Gandhi in Israel would probably end up with Gandhi being shot by some overzealous IDF butcher who would later get a medal for it.

Too true.

It reminds of me when Archbishop Desmond Tutu when to the West Bank to report on the plight of the Palestinians, only to be called 'an anti-Semite' 'Nazi' anti-Israel proponent' and just about every thing under the sun before being kicked out of the country. There are also numerous cases of extreme zealous Zionist settlers spitting at, and attacking and beating up foreign journalists for reporting on the Palestinians, one I believe a while ago by IDF checkpoint guards reporting on how long it takes for Palestinians to get home after working long hours.

Too true.

It reminds of me when Archbishop Desmond Tutu when to the West Bank to report on the plight of the Palestinians, only to be called 'an anti-Semite' 'Nazi' anti-Israel proponent' and just about every thing under the sun before being kicked out of the country. There are also numerous cases of extreme zealous Zionist settlers spitting at, and attacking and beating up foreign journalists for reporting on the Palestinians, one I believe a while ago by IDF checkpoint guards reporting on how long it takes for Palestinians to get home after working long hours.Which only shows that Israelis are wraiths.

Why do you hate Japanese people!?!!:mad:

I do? :confused:

Colonialist and Racist in nature. However the Brits, as is the way with Empires, incorporated the "natives" help oppress their fellows. The Palestinians have managed to avoid being pushed into this outright so far.

Wow - we agree on something. And this, of all things.

Amazing is it not?

Why not Jerusalem? Because dividing a city never works out well, and Israel has its capital - including all the major government infrastructure - in West Jerusalem. The city is majority Jewish. The Muslims can and do administer their holy sites. The current setup is fine.

Having as a seperate entity to all the other states would make all involved less hostile than that approach. The city only has a 60% (approx) jewish majority which makes the 30% (approx) islamic minority too large to consider it a (peaceful) expellable population.

To sum it up: Israelis do not want peace.

To sum it up: The 'free market' doesn't even exist with political parties.

Which only shows that Israelis are wraiths.

It shows that the settlers are nuts.

It shows that the settlers are nuts.The IDF is not made up entirely of settlers, is it?

The IDF is not made up entirely of settlers, is it?

Nope.

The IDF is not made up entirely of settlers, is it?

The Israeli millitary is an element of the State of Israel. That element is under the control of the civilian government. The government has a lot of pressure coming from the settler and orthodox/conservative groups.

Which only shows that Israelis are wraiths.
... Israelis are of obscure origin?

Or that Israelis are wraiths (http://www.kreativika.com/images/interviews/yonaz/ringwraith.jpg)?

"Come not between the Israeli and his land! Or he will not slay thee in thy turn. He will bear thee away to Tel Aviv, beyond all darkness, where thy flesh shall be devoured, and thy shrivelled mind be left naked to Mossad."

:confused:

... Israelis are of obscure origin?

Or that Israelis are wraiths (http://www.kreativika.com/images/interviews/yonaz/ringwraith.jpg)?

"Come not between the Israeli and his land! Or he will not slay thee in thy turn. He will bear thee away to Tel Aviv, beyond all darkness, where thy flesh shall be devoured, and thy shrivelled mind be left naked to Mossad."

Indeed:A wraith is an interesting representation of evil. [...]
Wraith is related to English words we know, for example wrath, which is anger. It’s related to wreath, which is a twisted thing. It’s related to the word writhe, which is to twist and turn. And all of these suggest that a wraith is something that is defined by shape, not by substance. [...]

This is something that is very distinctively modern. People of Tolkien’s generation had a problem identifying evil. They had no difficulty recognizing it – since they had to live through it. But the puzzling thing is that it seemed to be carried out by entirely normal people. And indeed Tolkien was a combat veteran of the First World War, and he knew that his own side did things like that too. The nature of evil in the past century has been curiously impersonal.

In the end you get the major atrocities of the last century being carried out by bureaucrats. Well, the people that do that kind of thing are wraiths. They’ve gone through the “wraithing” process. They don’t know what’s good and evil any more. It’s become a job or a routine. You start out with the good intentions, but somehow it all goes wrong.

This is a very distinctive image of evil, and a very unwelcome one. Because what it says is that it could be you. And under the right, or I should say wrong circumstances, it will be you.
Israelis cause suffering to Palestinians in a form of routine, they don't think about the effects of their deeds and presence anymore. They are wraiths, or at least somewhere along the wraithing process.

Israelis cause suffering to Palestinians in a form of routine, they don't think about the effects of their deeds and presence anymore. They are wraiths, or at least somewhere along the wraithing process.

And terrorists do not care about the suffering they cause when they blow themselves up on buses, in nightclubs, restaurants, etc. They are like Wraiths themselves.

And terrorists do not care about the suffering they cause when they blow themselves up on buses, in nightclubs, restaurants, etc. They are like Wraiths themselves.Wanna compare the number of deaths that Israel has caused so far with the number of Israelis that Palestinians have killed? You seem to forget that on the Palestinian side such actions are carried out by desperate individuals while Israel terrorizes Palestinians with the means it has as a state and military occupation force. Israelis cause suffering without thinking about it because they know they will not be held accountable.

Wanna compare the number of deaths that Israel has caused so far with the number of Israelis that Palestinians have killed?

Wanna compare healthcare systems to back those numbers up? I guess you forgot that it is healthcare that decides mortality rates in war and not the actual action.

You seem to forget that on the Palestinian side such actions are carried out by desperate individuals while Israel terrorizes Palestinians with the means it has as a state and military occupation force.

I suggest you look at the facts again. Most of the suicide bombers are actually middle class with good opportunities to actually succeed and not poor people who are desparate.

Wanna compare the number of deaths that Israel has caused so far with the number of Israelis that Palestinians have killed? You seem to forget that on the Palestinian side such actions are carried out by desperate individuals while Israel terrorizes Palestinians with the means it has as a state and military occupation force. Israelis cause suffering without thinking about it because they know they will not be held accountable.
Well, suicide bombers don't exactly get held accountable either...

Anyway, surely causing suffering knowing full well the consequences is more abhorrent than causing suffering and not thinking about it?

Well, suicide bombers don't exactly get held accountable either...

Anyway, surely causing suffering knowing full well the consequences is more abhorrent than causing suffering and not thinking about it?

One would think that but UB does not see it that way. Even Nodinia does not like him and that is saying something.

Korean was only because of the Cold War and Kuwait, well you got me there. Maybe Israel is lucky it hasn't been invaded by US led UN forces.




Actually if you read the whole article Israel was outnumbered the entire time.

First it was 29,677 vs. 31,250 (about) with the 31000 (Arab) having 204 planes and 3 armoured battalions with 115 extra artillery pieces. The Israelis had no and i quote from the wiki "Initially, the Haganah had no heavy machine guns, artillery, armoured vehicles, anti-tank or anti-aircraft weapons." meaning that the Arabs should rule the day based on aircraft and tanks alone.
Numbers aren't everything, from what I can gather the Israeli soldiers were trained and well organised, whereas many of the Arab forces weren't. Like I said, Israel rated its chances at 50-50, I'd back professional Military Dudes over me in terms of military assessments most days of the week.

Uhhh... no. The Palestinian people were fucked either way. Hamas was not elected on a "Throw the Jews Down the Well" campaign. They were elected on the promise of cleaning up government.

You see? The Palestinians only have a choice between the Jihadist Fruitcakes in Hamas, and the Fucking Corrupt Fatcats of Fatah who were lining their pockets at the expense of the Palestinian people.

Choosing between shit and shinola is not a real choice. You're just wanting to pick out which dark sticky stuff smells better.


I understand the issue with not having a real choice given that the U.S. hasn't have a real choice for President since Ronald Reagan was elected, but that doesn't discount the affect.

In my view, you can't discount any part of an organizations agenda. Meaning you cannot separate their desire to clean up the government from their anti-Isreal attitudes. The reason for this is that no matter how you look at it one of their interests is alway going to take precedence. In the case of Hamas, there is no doubt that they "Down with Isreal" attitude will prevail because everything that Isreal does directly affects politics in the West Bank, and the Gaza Strip and because a large portion of the Palestinians money comes directly from funds collected by the Isreal. Based on this, I do believe that while many Palestinians might want peace, there is a lack of political commitment to make it happen. Besides, there are Middle Eastern countries that have a vested interest in keeping the Isreali/Palestinian conflict alive and would not want to see Hamas change their anti-Isreal attitude.

Actually the majority of Palestinians favour a two-state solution, as do the majority of Israelis.

While most may favor it, there is a vast difference between favoring something and actually wanting to see it happen. One is just a preference, the other is actually being interested in taking action to make it happen and electing Hamas shows evidence in a lack of desire to make the two-state solution a reality.

While most may favor it, there is a vast difference between favoring something and actually wanting to see it happen. One is just a preference, the other is actually being interested in taking action to make it happen and electing Hamas shows evidence in a lack of desire to make the two-state solution a reality.

And yet corruption played more of a factor in the election of Hamas than a desire in not seeing a two state solution.