The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

Stormrage · 2008-05-11 10:54:24

Ah, you're a Muslim. Now I see why you're so anti Israel.

And your one of those crazy guys on the net. I've seen your threads. You make Tom "Kick Sunnis out of Iraq"Kalbfus seem normal.

What did those 'Palestinians' (Palestine is just the whole area, so Israelies are Palestinians as well) do when Israel left the Gaza Strip? Tore down all the buildings, then complained that there was nowhere to live. I have no sympathy for such idiotic behavior.

Those were looters. The people complaining where the non looters. Learn the bloody difference. Or is there no difference when it come to arabs? Do you see them all has just one evil borg like group? I'm suprised you haven't called then Sand N~ yet.

Oh and by the way. The only Palestinian Israelis are Arabs and pre-Zionist movement Jews. You know people who actually lived in that country before they Nazis came.

Unless those Civilians are non-muslims. Then it's all fine and dandy. I've read the Quar'an. I know what Old Mo' taught.

No you haven't. I am 110% you have never read the Quran. What you probably did is to find quotes from the internet collected by idiots who like to perpetuate that Islam is responsible for all evil. It's the modern day Jewish conspiracy. Oh and muslims can't discriminate against non muslim civilians. A civilian is a civilian.

Don't try saying Islam wasn't building an Empire. History is against you if you do.

It wasn't either. A Muslim is only allowed to fight if attacked. If he is attacked and the enemy sincerely wants a ceasefire then the Muslim has to talk. I think what your getting confused is between what Muslims did and what Islam says. It would be like me calling Christianity the greatest evil to appear in the world because Christians conquered a huge swathe of the world which ended up with millions of people dead and millions of others under the rule of foreigners.

If you want to debate about how evil Islam is. Start a thread and show me your evidence. Trust I've actually had these debates before and I have won every single one of them because I usually show that the guy arguing Islam is evil has no idea what he is talking about. Just copying and pasting.

Terraformer · 2008-05-11 12:46:33

Yes, I find quotes on the net. But I check them in the Quar'an.

Don't try telling me that a so-called 'Prophet' who married a six year old girl and consummated the marriage when she was nine was good. Nowadays we'd call someone who did that a Paedophile.

The only Palestinian Israelis are Arabs and pre-Zionist movement Jews.

Isn't it funny how one moment a load of people are Jordanians, the next they've suddenly become Palestinians? Get your facts right: Palestine isn't a country, it's an area.

Israel surrendered the Gaza strip. But still they cried 'more, more, give us more. We won't stop till Israel is destroyed.'

Have you bothered looking at a map of the Middle East? I don't think you have, because if you had you would havem realized that Israel is about the size of Wales and is surrounded by bigger countries that are Muslim dominated.

I'll start one and show everyone how wrong you are.

Stormrage · 2008-05-11 15:23:34

Yes, I find quotes on the net. But I check them in the Quar'an.

Well do me a favour when you find those quotes and you check the Quran. Check whats above the specific line and whats below it. I have embarrassed to many people who tried to pass of the Quran has a war book by just simply copying and pasting the full sentence to show the part about peace.

Don't try telling me that a so-called 'Prophet' who married a six year old girl and consummated the marriage when she was nine was good. Nowadays we'd call someone who did that a Paedophile

Thank you for pointing that out your self. I was going to go on my usual moral relativism response on how in many cultures girls married very young. Thats including Europe.

Isn't it funny how one moment a load of people are Jordanians, the next they've suddenly become Palestinians? Get your facts right: Palestine isn't a country, it's an area.

First you all you need to get your facts straight. There is no such thing has Jordan,Iraq and Syria. That was the invention of the Europeans who back stabbed their allies. What is not in question is that the Arabs were living in the area called Palestine until the '48. The reason why they are called Palestinians is because they lived in Palestine like you said your self. Where have I made a mistake?

Israel surrendered the Gaza strip. But still they cried 'more, more, give us more. We won't stop till Israel is destroyed.'

Well when your house is taken by thieves and they only give you back the the closet. You kinda want more. I'm sure you wouldn't understand considering that you live in a country who believed that they had the right to kick and kill any Indians living in any territory wanted by White Americans because God deemed the White man superior.

Have you bothered looking at a map of the Middle East? I don't think you have, because if you had you would havem realized that Israel is about the size of Wales and is surrounded by bigger countries that are Muslim dominated.

Have you looked at the maps of the villages that are depopulated? Those villages aren't in Jordan. They aren't in Algeria. They aren't in Egypt. They aren't in Somalia. They aren't in Saudi Arabia. They are in modern day Israel. Tell those people to forget the land their family have spent farming several centuries before English smugglers decided to throw cheap tea into the sea and call it liberty.

This is the worst come back I have ever seen in all the time I have debated with people about Palestine. Most people realise this and they choose to avoid it. Where in Gods name does this fly? If the French were kicked out of France would tell them to live in Germany?

Commodore · 2008-05-11 22:53:12

Ah, an Arab-Israeli conflict discussion. Like competing in the special Olympics...

A couple points about war and civilians. It's wonderful and idealistic to proclaim civilians off limits in war. It should be followed whenever the situation permits. Trillions of dollars have been spent to make war so swift and accurate that an armed conflict is settled before they can become involved.

Unfortunately it doesn't work that way. Wars simply do not happen without civilians. Whether its the millions of weapons factory workers keeping the war going, or citizen soldiers dropping a couple of grenades on passing soldiers. We can draw a sharp contrast between what happens when the war is taken to the enemies homeland, and when it isn't. The technology was not yet mature in the first world war, and we had millions of lives wasted for no gain on a frontline that didn't move for years. By the time WW2 came along, we were able to disassemble the German war machine by air, and they were short of everything near the end. As for moral targets, all I can say is it is very effective when employed by militias in Iraq on the local populations. A few gunman can terrorize an area, and it takes a long time to root them out and restore the confidence of the population. And if you say a particular area is off limits, the enemy will take up position there. Don't try yourself up like that. Whether it works with air bombardment, probably not so much. In any event, theres no good in war, the only good can come when the victor gets to carry out its goals, and then only when the goals are good. Its easy to say the ends don't justify the means until you come face to face with the enemies ends.

As for Israel v. Arabs, its really simple. I don't believe for a minute that Hamas has anything but the destruction Israel in mind. Fatah may have seen enough fighting to just sit back and protect their own butts.

But I do know that no party claiming to represent the Arab population on the former British mandate of Palestine, or the pre 67 territories of Egypt and Jordan give a rats hind quarters about the people they claim to represent. Given all the money the Arabs states have given over the years those people should all be living in guided estates on half the land the Israels have given. They still live in impoverished slums, short of everything but ammo and rockets. Those people are pawns to be paraded in front of a sympathetic Western Media.

I say pack them all up and move them into the Sinai, under Western protection, technology and development policies they could live kings within a decade.

cIclops · 2008-05-12 04:02:19

Well written Commodore, however, the Arab-Israeli conflict situation is far far more complex and doesn't fit nicely into such a simple analysis. Many factions are involved on both sides, each with their own agenda. Several external powers have stakes too, and of course there's regional spill over and links to other conflicts. As if that wasn't enough, there are powerful religious, political and racial factors.

Deporting the Palestinians, or even the Israelis, into Sinai won't solve the problem either. Can you imagine the reaction to the forcible relocation of millions of people, and who would do it? Land rights are central to this conflict, people will fight and die for their own few square meters, their religion, their culture and their country. When two groups both claim ownership over the same piece of land, conflict usually continues until one side is defeated.

If there was a simple solution it would have been found a long time ago.

To bring this back on topic, what is Obama's solution?

Stormrage · 2008-05-12 13:45:55

Ignore the idiots. One good example was Nash McCabe in the last debate. Her husband is unable to work due to disabilities and she has become unemployed. Now instead of asking about what Barack Hussein Obama was going to do about the economy and health care. She goes with the flag.

If she and anybody who focuses on the stupid flag issue can't figure out that there are bigger issues then they deserve everything Bush gave them.

Commodore · 2008-05-12 18:25:39

Deporting the Palestinians, or even the Israelis, into Sinai won't solve the problem either. Can you imagine the reaction to the forcible relocation of millions of people, and who would do it? Land rights are central to this conflict, people will fight and die for their own few square meters, their religion, their culture and their country. When two groups both claim ownership over the same piece of land, conflict usually continues until one side is defeated.
If there was a simple solution it would have been found a long time ago.
To bring this back on topic, what is Obama's solution?

Oh sure, its not about land to live on to these people, it's about that particular patch of dirt. Never mind that fact that despite officially being a Jewish state, 20% of the population is Muslim Arab, and despite 60 years of existence, and 40 years after capturing Jerusalem, theres still a Mosque on the Temple mount, you still can't get it through these peoples heads that Israel isn't just sticking it to the Muslims and denying them access to holy sites.

But its not about the amount, or even the quality of the land. The Palestinians could prosper on the land they have. Its not the Israelis that are holding them back.

As for Barack Hussein Obama, he recently jettisoned an adviser with links to Hamas, refused to fault Jimmy Carter for meeting with them, and proudly proclaims willingness to meet with their Iranian and Syrian allies.

Gregori · 2008-05-13 07:47:28

Oh sure, its not about land to live on to these people, it's about that particular patch of dirt. Never mind that fact that despite officially being a Jewish state, 20% of the population is Muslim Arab, and despite 60 years of existence, and 40 years after capturing Jerusalem, theres still a Mosque on the Temple mount, you still can't get it through these peoples heads that Israel isn't just sticking it to the Muslims and denying them access to holy sites.
But its not about the amount, or even the quality of the land. The Palestinians could prosper on the land they have. Its not the Israelis that are holding them back.
As for Barack Hussein Obama, he recently jettisoned an adviser with links to Hamas, refused to fault Jimmy Carter for meeting with them, and proudly proclaims willingness to meet with their Iranian and Syrian allies.

Actually, The state of Israel carried out very specific policies to make sure that its still a Jewish state. Its refered to as the 'Demographic' problem. In other words, if too many of the arabs and muslims were allowed to be full citizens of the state, it would be democratically impossible for it to be a 'jewish' state anymore.

The solution for this dilemma was of course just using lots of force and depriving people of rights, turning the palestinians into one of the worlds biggest refugee populations.

I don't know about you, but I certainly wouldn't like to have my home bulldozed and the land seized so people of a preferred ethnicity or nationality can live there.

I'm pretty sure you could prosper on any given land. Doesn't mean I have the right to destroy your home and kick you off the land. If the Palestinians can live on any patch of dirt, so can the Israeli's.

Obviously thats not a fair or acceptable solution to either group, so there will have to be an acommodation. The Israeli state will either have to accept all those within its borders and the occupied territories as full and equal citizens without preference (this could be a federal state) or a two state solution will have to be worked out that doesn't make either state unworkable and chopped up.

Commodore · 2008-05-13 09:09:22

Actually, The state of Israel carried out very specific policies to make sure that its still a Jewish state. Its refered to as the 'Demographic' problem. In other words, if too many of the arabs and muslims were allowed to be full citizens of the state, it would be democratically impossible for it to be a 'jewish' state anymore.
The solution for this dilemma was of course just using lots of force and depriving people of rights, turning the palestinians into one of the worlds biggest refugee populations.

The the so called "refugees" are the children and grandchildren of those who fled the fighting of the War for Independence back in '48. They choose wrong in assuming that their Arab brethren would win that war. They still call themselves refugees and living in poverty for geopolitical expedience. The Palestinian Authority got away with doing nothing for the people on the promise of a plush penthouse apartment in Mohamedtown (formally known as Tel Aviv) someday.

The diplomatic solution is called the right of return, and the PA has been holding out for decades to secure it for generations of those who never lived there, knowing full well it would create an instant apartheid.

I don't know about you, but I certainly wouldn't like to have my home bulldozed and the land seized so people of a preferred ethnicity or nationality can live there.

I would probably like it just as much as the Israelis like the Palestinians using that house to build rockets to fire into Israel.

Tom Kalbfus · 2008-05-13 09:15:16

Oh sure, its not about land to live on to these people, it's about that particular patch of dirt. Never mind that fact that despite officially being a Jewish state, 20% of the population is Muslim Arab, and despite 60 years of existence, and 40 years after capturing Jerusalem, theres still a Mosque on the Temple mount, you still can't get it through these peoples heads that Israel isn't just sticking it to the Muslims and denying them access to holy sites.
But its not about the amount, or even the quality of the land. The Palestinians could prosper on the land they have. Its not the Israelis that are holding them back.
As for Barack Hussein Obama, he recently jettisoned an adviser with links to Hamas, refused to fault Jimmy Carter for meeting with them, and proudly proclaims willingness to meet with their Iranian and Syrian allies.

Actually, The state of Israel carried out very specific policies to make sure that its still a Jewish state. Its refered to as the 'Demographic' problem. In other words, if too many of the arabs and muslims were allowed to be full citizens of the state, it would be democratically impossible for it to be a 'jewish' state anymore.
The solution for this dilemma was of course just using lots of force and depriving people of rights, turning the palestinians into one of the worlds biggest refugee populations.
I don't know about you, but I certainly wouldn't like to have my home bulldozed and the land seized so people of a preferred ethnicity or nationality can live there.
I'm pretty sure you could prosper on any given land. Doesn't mean I have the right to destroy your home and kick you off the land. If the Palestinians can live on any patch of dirt, so can the Israeli's.
Obviously thats not a fair or acceptable solution to either group, so there will have to be an acommodation. The Israeli state will either have to accept all those within its borders and the occupied territories as full and equal citizens without preference (this could be a federal state) or a two state solution will have to be worked out that doesn't make either state unworkable and chopped up.

If the Majority of Americans were Muslim, we'd have problems with terrorism and people blowing themselves up right now. We'd have muslims demanding official recognition of a certain brand of Islam as the official state religion, and they would seriously "step on the toes" of those wishing to belong to some other religion or wishing to pursuade or convert others from the desired official version of Islam, with the death penalty being demanded of transgressors.

I think its fair to say that Islam in general is not very tollerant of other people's faiths or of the right of individuals to convert from Islam to something else, the right to free speech or "blasphemy", the rights of women to making their own choices without a brother, husband of father to sponsor them. I can seriously say if I were to put myself in a typical Israeli Jew's shoes, I would not want Islam to become the majority religion in my country. I could tolerate being a minority in a western Christian Nation because there is a tradition of tollerance of other faiths in those nations, but in Islamic ones, the government actually has to have a religion, the Islamic adherents demand it of their government, just look at what's happening in Turkey and Iraq if you don't believe me. Islam believes the law should be handed down by God. In Islamic States there is a Judicial and a Executive branch of government, but not a legislative branch of government that is elected by the people. The concept of the people deciding their own laws is an athema to Islam as most Muslims believe the Law should be derived from the Koran, so it all devolves from how the Judicial Branch interprets the Koran in deciding law and the people have no input in the process.

Of course if you are a clever judge, you could derive lots of power through creative interpretation of the Koran in your own favor, and you have all these worshippers hanging onto your every word in running their lives. There is lots of power to be had in Muslim countries if you know how to pull the right strings, and all you really have to do is grow a beard and look "Holy" to them. That is how most Muslim societies are run in my opinion, I wouldn't want a compromise between that and Democracy, because then you end up with something that is less that democratic, Iran is just such a compromise between a Republic and Theocracy. I don't know if I'd want Israel to be a Jewish State, but I'd certainly want it to be a non-muslim state.

Stormrage · 2008-05-13 16:08:20

There is lots of power to be had in Muslim countries if you know how to pull the right strings, and all you really have to do is grow a beard and look "Holy" to them. That is how most Muslim societies are run in my opinion,

In your opinion. But then again. Weren't you the guy who thought the problems in Iraq could be solved if the Sunni Iraqis got kicked out of Iraq?

Keep your opinion to your self. In most "Muslim" nations. The leaders are secular and they have a bad habit of torturing and killing Muslim elders.

If the Majority of Americans were Muslim, we'd have problems with terrorism and people blowing themselves up right now. We'd have muslims demanding official recognition of a certain brand of Islam as the official state religion, and they would seriously "step on the toes" of those wishing to belong to some other religion or wishing to pursuade or convert others from the desired official version of Islam, with the death penalty being demanded of transgressors.

Do you have any evidence for this? Or is this something you wrote after a spell with vodka?

The the so called "refugees" are the children and grandchildren of those who fled the fighting of the War for Independence back in '48. They choose wrong in assuming that their Arab brethren would win that war. They still call themselves refugees and living in poverty for geopolitical expedience. The Palestinian Authority got away with doing nothing for the people on the promise of a plush penthouse apartment in Mohamedtown (formally known as Tel Aviv) someday.

IT WAS A WAR. You know what civilians do during a war? They leave the areas near fighting. What the hell did you expect them to do? Stay there while the Jews and Arab fighters were killing each other. Hoping that when the Jews come for them a Deir Yassin wouldn't happen. They are refugees because they can't go back to their original homeland. Despite Jewish claims these people never lived in Egypt ,Syria and Jordan. They lived in Palestine.

By the way. The Palestinians did do something about Fatah curroption. They elected a party that proved it's self to be anti-corruption. Hamas. I seem to remember a certain nation encouraging Hamas to start a coup. The same nation that wanted democracy in the Middle East.

The diplomatic solution is called the right of return, and the PA has been holding out for decades to secure it for generations of those who never lived there, knowing full well it would create an instant apartheid.

Those who have never lived in Palestine. Still have the deed and key to their old homes. What do you want them to do? Destroy them?

I would probably like it just as much as the Israelis like the Palestinians using that house to build rockets to fire into Israel.

When did Israel start putting up settlements? Oh yeah. Several decades before the rocket attacks.

Never mind that fact that despite officially being a Jewish state, 20% of the population is Muslim Arab, and despite 60 years of existence, and 40 years after capturing Jerusalem, theres still a Mosque on the Temple mount, you still can't get it through these peoples heads that Israel isn't just sticking it to the Muslims and denying them access to holy sites.

1: Israeli Arabs are facing discrimination in Israel.
2: Israel has gone through projects to make sure that Jerusalem stays a Jewish city.
3: Israel restricts access to the Mosque.

But its not about the amount, or even the quality of the land. The Palestinians could prosper on the land they have. Its not the Israelis that are holding them back.

Israel IS holding them back. Even before the Intifada when the Palestinians weren't resisting. Israel held full control of Gaza and West Bank. Those two areas were basically Israeli. The best the Palestinian could hope for was to get a day job in Israel.

As for Barack Hussein Obama, he recently jettisoned an adviser with links to Hamas, refused to fault Jimmy Carter for meeting with them, and proudly proclaims willingness to meet with their Iranian and Syrian allies.

He has no ties to Hamas. He meet Hamas has part of his job in the International Crisis Group. He unlike politicians actually have to get both sides of the story before making their minds up.

Commodore · 2008-05-13 21:21:24

The the so called "refugees" are the children and grandchildren of those who fled the fighting of the War for Independence back in '48. They choose wrong in assuming that their Arab brethren would win that war. They still call themselves refugees and living in poverty for geopolitical expedience. The Palestinian Authority got away with doing nothing for the people on the promise of a plush penthouse apartment in Mohamedtown (formally known as Tel Aviv) someday.
IT WAS A WAR. You know what civilians do during a war? They leave the areas near fighting. What the hell did you expect them to do? Stay there while the Jews and Arab fighters were killing each other. Hoping that when the Jews come for them a Deir Yassin wouldn't happen. They are refugees because they can't go back to their original homeland. Despite Jewish claims these people never lived in Egypt ,Syria and Jordan. They lived in Palestine.

Of course they are going to leave. But we are talking about a war for control of territory. If you lose, you don't get control of the territory.

By the way. The Palestinians did do something about Fatah curroption. They elected a party that proved it's self to be anti-corruption. Hamas. I seem to remember a certain nation encouraging Hamas to start a coup. The same nation that wanted democracy in the Middle East.

Yeah, how's that working out for them?

The diplomatic solution is called the right of return, and the PA has been holding out for decades to secure it for generations of those who never lived there, knowing full well it would create an instant apartheid.

Those who have never lived in Palestine. Still have the deed and key to their old homes. What do you want them to do? Destroy them?

According to UN numbers, about 770,000 people fled what would become pre-1967 Israel, a population that has now grown to 4 million. Now even if you are going to take the foolish step of giving back land gained in a war of Arab aggression, your not going to give land everything to pop out of a uterus ever since.

I would probably like it just as much as the Israelis like the Palestinians using that house to build rockets to fire into Israel.
When did Israel start putting up settlements? Oh yeah. Several decades before the rocket attacks.

How many settlements does Israel have in Gaza now?
Were do the rockets come from?

Never mind that fact that despite officially being a Jewish state, 20% of the population is Muslim Arab, and despite 60 years of existence, and 40 years after capturing Jerusalem, theres still a Mosque on the Temple mount, you still can't get it through these peoples heads that Israel isn't just sticking it to the Muslims and denying them access to holy sites.
1: Israeli Arabs are facing discrimination in Israel.
2: Israel has gone through projects to make sure that Jerusalem stays a Jewish city.
3: Israel restricts access to the Mosque.

Really, cause the only legal difference is the Arabs are not required to serve in the IDF.

Unless you consider merely being less numerous to be discrimination.

But its not about the amount, or even the quality of the land. The Palestinians could prosper on the land they have. Its not the Israelis that are holding them back.
Israel IS holding them back. Even before the Intifada when the Palestinians weren't resisting. Israel held full control of Gaza and West Bank. Those two areas were basically Israeli. The best the Palestinian could hope for was to get a day job in Israel.

So tell me, what domestic governmental function do the Israelis deny either the Fatah or Hamas governments to perform?

As for Barack Hussein Obama, he recently jettisoned an adviser with links to Hamas, refused to fault Jimmy Carter for meeting with them, and proudly proclaims willingness to meet with their Iranian and Syrian allies.
He has no ties to Hamas. He meet Hamas has part of his job in the International Crisis Group. He unlike politicians actually have to get both sides of the story before making their minds up.

So I suppose he'll be sitting down with Osama next. Youknow, just to get his side of the story.

Gregori · 2008-05-14 05:30:09

I've never seen a thread that is so much in favour of Hitler in my life!

If the attitude is that you can use war to take anything you want and fuck everybody else who gets in your way, then I have no sympathy for anything that comes your way. You deserve all of it.

In the modern era, using millitary force to kick indiginous people out of their lands is slightly frowned upon. Actually, what Israel is doing is illegal. Its been warned repeatedly, but its a rogue state.

Its not okay to just knock down people's houses and build a settlement over them. The statement about rocket attacks is a farce since settlements are going to incite more violence and be good targets for rocket attacks since they're building in the danger zone. We all know its Israeli expansionism, not security that drives the seettlements.

The Israeli state allows for Jews from anywhere in the world to become citizens. Tell me you don't blush with embarrasment when complaining about the right to return for Palestinians!

The Israeli have no more claim to be in that place than anybody else (probably less since they have only been there for a few decades)

Very simply, the state of Israel has to make all those within its borders and the occupied territories full legal citizens and become a non-denominational democratic state or two states will have to be recognized.

Commodore · 2008-05-14 08:04:05

Quite the series to nearly context less statements that can just an easily be applied to the Arabs and be more accurate you got there.

I've never seen a thread that is so much in favour of Hitler in my life!

Look theres one.

If the attitude is that you can use war to take anything you want and fuck everybody else who gets in your way, then I have no sympathy for anything that comes your way. You deserve all of it.

While you've brilliantly described the '48 War, I don't think thats what you intended to do.

In the modern era, using millitary force to kick indiginous people out of their lands is slightly frowned upon.

The Israelis sure did. Thats why they are still there.

Its not okay to just knock down people's houses and build a settlement over them. The statement about rocket attacks is a farce since settlements are going to incite more violence and be good targets for rocket attacks since they're building in the danger zone. We all know its Israeli expansionism, not security that drives the seettlements.

In case you missed it, the Israelis pulled out of Gaza in 2005 after decades of demands from everyone under the sun. It was suppose to make Israel more secure, and help the Strip be a little less of a third world slum. Many settlements, Israeli settlements, were closed and bulldozed in the West Bank, with plans to do the same for almost all of them. No more settlements, heavy perimeter defense, lots of surviellence.

Yet for some reason there are still daily rocket attacks on villages in southern Israel. Gaza is still a slum. Hamas spends all their time fortifying the place and teaching children things about Jews that would make Hitler blush. Theres a couple lessons to be learned from this, things that were known before hand and screamed from the mountain tops to anyone who would listen (no one did apparently), mainly, don't give anything to terrorists, and terrorist won't be happy until all the jews are out of the entire British mandate.

The Israeli state allows for Jews from anywhere in the world to become citizens. Tell me you don't blush with embarrasment when complaining about the right to return for Palestinians!

A sovereign country has the right to set its own immigration policies. I Palestine ever gets its act together maybe they can too.

The Israeli have no more claim to be in that place than anybody else (probably less since they have only been there for a few decades)

Actually Jews continuously occupied the country in varying percentages for thousands of years.

If you want to blame anyone, blame the British for allowing enough of them in to hold off the the combined armies of 5 Arab states.

Very simply, the state of Israel has to make all those within its borders and the occupied territories full legal citizens and become a non-denominational democratic state or two states will have to be recognized.

I have no problem with a two state solution. But I don't believe the players in Palestine and the Muslim world in general are going to be happy with that.

bobunf · 2008-05-14 11:06:21

All of the pronouncements about legality, historical perspective and the rights and wrongs of everyone in and around the Arab-Israeli conflict are not helpful in dealing with today’s situation on the ground.

> From a rational Palestine point of view, they’ve been kicked out of their houses and off the land they’ve occupied for centuries, and they want it back. Also, perhaps 100 thousand Arabs have died in these conflicts over the last 60 years, and many more have been permanently injured or wounded, huge amounts of Arab property has been destroyed and damaged, there have been terrible and innumerable humiliations and atrocities, and feelings of rage and helplessness.

Literally millions of Arabs have been directly affected, and the resulting hatred is poisonous, corroding and nearly impossible to deal with. One knows that, if all the Jews moved to Antarctica, many Arabs would pursue them with guns, rockets and other unpleasantness.

Then there are irrational Arab points of view, rooted in distorted views of history (when you start from illusions the results aren’t going to be good), fueled with conspiracy nonsense, justified religiously, nationalistically, ethnically, and making everything worse.

> From a rational Jewish point of view, for millennia Jews have been murdered, raped, robbed, expelled, humiliated with the whole thing culminating in one of the largest genocides in history—probably the largest as a fraction of the original population—as a consequence of Germany’s psychotic break with reality over a twelve year period. Germany, a Christian nation, culturally and scientifically advanced.

The Holocaust understandably traumatized the whole Jewish population for generations into the present day, and they established themselves in the ancestral homeland of 18 centuries before—to which they had always maintained ties. And now they have the understandable attitude that they are not going to be exterminated again without putting up a big fight. “Never again.”

The Jews, of course, have their own casualties in the Arab-Israeli conflicts, their own hatreds, irrationalities and disconnects from reality.

> There are also the differences in economic status between the two groups, a difference which produces more sets of problems.

It’s like the irresistible force meeting the immovable object.

Such a bitter, intractable conflict can be resolved (at least temporarily) by conquest, or by accommodation of both groups. It’s not possible for Israel to conquer all of the Arabs (and, I guess they’d have to include Iran these days). And the Israeli nuclear doctrine would make an Arab conquest of Israel very expensive—100 million dead, world economic dislocations for decades, a radioactive Middle East.

That leaves only accommodation, which will require forgiveness, or, at least, forgetting. I think it also requires rationality, an accurate perception of reality, and, even, open minds.

We can make a tiny start by forgetting polemics, and abandoning illusions. Maybe begin on this board, in this thread.

Bob

Stormrage · 2008-05-14 11:43:28

Of course they are going to leave. But we are talking about a war for control of territory. If you lose, you don't get control of the territory.

No it wasn't. It was a war of who would control the nation politically. Up until that point Jews didn't take Arab land they bought it and Arabs didn't take Jewish land. It was a war of who would control the nation politically. Would it be the European Jews who are only there because of their failed integration in Europe or the Arabs who have been there through thick and thin.

Yeah, how's that working out for them?

Actually I meant Fatah. They were supplied and trained with US backing by Egypt and guess what? THEY LOST to Hamas. Apparently Hamas got CIA files that Fatah were keeping on them and other Resistant groups.

According to UN numbers, about 770,000 people fled what would become pre-1967 Israel, a population that has now grown to 4 million. Now even if you are going to take the foolish step of giving back land gained in a war of Arab aggression, your not going to give land everything to pop out of a uterus ever since.

If this was 1948 it would have a been a problem since most of them would have been farmers. But this is 2008. Agriculture is left to big companies and rare farmers.

How many settlements does Israel have in Gaza now?
Were do the rockets come from?

Gaza is still controlled by Israel. Everything in Gaza runs to the whim of Israel. Oh and Israel refuses to talk to Hamas. There is the bummer. How can you expect Hamas to stop firing if they haven't signed a truce?

Really, cause the only legal difference is the Arabs are not required to serve in the IDF.
Unless you consider merely being less numerous to be discrimination.

Legally. Just like Black people in pre-60s USA were equal blacks. How did black people feel about that? Oh yeah. They hated it and protested for equal rights. Only this time. When Israeli Arabs try to protest they get abuse and one time several kids where shot dead. Their killer hasn't even been punished.

So I suppose he'll be sitting down with Osama next. Youknow, just to get his side of the story.

America must suck if you can make your mind up by listening to one person. Thats probably why hundreds of black men were lynched just because white women accused. I would have thought you guys moved on from that period. I see some habits are to give up.

The Israelis sure did. Thats why they are still there.

They are only there because USA and Germany support them. If they didn't have any backings from America. They would have been sanctioned harder then Apartheid South Africa.

Stormrage · 2008-05-15 08:02:59

Sorry for double posting.

In case you missed it, the Israelis pulled out of Gaza in 2005 after decades of demands from everyone under the sun. It was suppose to make Israel more secure, and help the Strip be a little less of a third world slum. Many settlements, Israeli settlements, were closed and bulldozed in the West Bank, with plans to do the same for almost all of them. No more settlements, heavy perimeter defense, lots of surviellence.

This is either unintentional mistake or your just lying. I'm going to hope it's the former.

1: Israel pulled out UNILATERALLY. They didn't talk to anyone about it. They just pulled out. Hamas and Fatah fighters went to the Israeli settlements and made sure that the looters didn't take necessary equipment like electrical cables.
2: Olmert was elected on West Bank disengagement. That was the election issue. The platform for Kadima. He has failed to achieve that. After he took down a few settlements he stopped. He built more of them. Which basically negated anything that he has done before. All because a bunch of extremists who harass Palestinian civilians every single day called the soldiers Nazis.
3: There are no plans to get rid of settlements in West Bank. In fact the Plan so far is to steal has much Arab land in the West Bank has possible through the Israeli Apartheid wall. If Israel was serious about pulling out. The Pre-67 border would be have been adhered to.

A good example of how Israel isn't being honest is to look at America. Parts of the American border wall were accidentally built into Mexican territory. It was only a few feet. Not much to make the Mexicans upset but the entire part of the wall which was on the Mexican side was torn down and built on the American side. That cost millions.

Yet for some reason there are still daily rocket attacks on villages in southern Israel. Gaza is still a slum. Hamas spends all their time fortifying the place and teaching children things about Jews that would make Hitler blush. Theres a couple lessons to be learned from this, things that were known before hand and screamed from the mountain tops to anyone who would listen (no one did apparently), mainly, don't give anything to terrorists, and terrorist won't be happy until all the jews are out of the entire British mandate.

Thats an exaggeration. Hitler would have never blushed at what Hamas does. Probably laugh at the way some of the kidds mascot always end up being killed by Israelis,Israeli actions or Fatah. Other then that I don't see anything that would stand up to reason. Hamas and Israel haven't signed a peace deal or a truce. Why should Hamas stop? There is nothing obligating them. Israel tries to block Gaza to make the people in Gaza resist. It fails. They then punish the entire Gaza community. Despite the fact that Hamas isn't affected much. They have smuggling tunnels that go into Egypt. They are getting a steady amount of Israeli fertilisers from Egypt.

A sovereign country has the right to set its own immigration policies. I Palestine ever gets its act together maybe they can too.

Israel has no internationally recognised sovereignty over the West Bank. Yet Russians who have dubious Jewish backgrounds can build a house in the West Bank while Palestinians face the fear of having their house tore down just because they didn't get a permit. Which is next to impossible for an Arab to get.

Actually Jews continuously occupied the country in varying percentages for thousands of years.

Has a minority.

If you want to blame anyone, blame the British for allowing enough of them in to hold off the the combined armies of 5 Arab states.

I blame the British for backstabbing the Arabs. I also blame them for allowing Jews to immigrate knowing that they wanted to take over the land eventually and not live peacefully with the Arabs.

I have no problem with a two state solution. But I don't believe the players in Palestine and the Muslim world in general are going to be happy with that.

Tell that to the nation that is trying to annex West Bank in a fait accompli move.

Tom Kalbfus · 2008-05-15 10:25:42

Sorry for double posting.
In case you missed it, the Israelis pulled out of Gaza in 2005 after decades of demands from everyone under the sun. It was suppose to make Israel more secure, and help the Strip be a little less of a third world slum. Many settlements, Israeli settlements, were closed and bulldozed in the West Bank, with plans to do the same for almost all of them. No more settlements, heavy perimeter defense, lots of surviellence.
This is either unintentional mistake or your just lying. I'm going to hope it's the former.
1: Israel pulled out UNILATERALLY. They didn't talk to anyone about it. They just pulled out. Hamas and Fatah fighters went to the Israeli settlements and made sure that the looters didn't take necessary equipment like electrical cables.
2: Olmert was elected on West Bank disengagement. That was the election issue. The platform for Kadima. He has failed to achieve that. After he took down a few settlements he stopped. He built more of them. Which basically negated anything that he has done before. All because a bunch of extremists who harass Palestinian civilians every single day called the soldiers Nazis.
3: There are no plans to get rid of settlements in West Bank. In fact the Plan so far is to steal has much Arab land in the West Bank has possible through the Israeli Apartheid wall. If Israel was serious about pulling out. The Pre-67 border would be have been adhered to.
A good example of how Israel isn't being honest is to look at America. Parts of the American border wall were accidentally built into Mexican territory. It was only a few feet. Not much to make the Mexicans upset but the entire part of the wall which was on the Mexican side was torn down and built on the American side. That cost millions.

Yet for some reason there are still daily rocket attacks on villages in southern Israel. Gaza is still a slum. Hamas spends all their time fortifying the place and teaching children things about Jews that would make Hitler blush. Theres a couple lessons to be learned from this, things that were known before hand and screamed from the mountain tops to anyone who would listen (no one did apparently), mainly, don't give anything to terrorists, and terrorist won't be happy until all the jews are out of the entire British mandate.
Thats an exaggeration. Hitler would have never blushed at what Hamas does. Probably laugh at the way some of the kidds mascot always end up being killed by Israelis,Israeli actions or Fatah. Other then that I don't see anything that would stand up to reason. Hamas and Israel haven't signed a peace deal or a truce. Why should Hamas stop? There is nothing obligating them.

How about morality? How about that killing is wrong? They are killing innocent people, not people that have done them any harm! How would the World fell if Israel started randomly killing innocent Palestinians, and I mean randomly, not precision weapons, they would just carpet bomb whole Palestinian villages, towns and cities reducing the whole thing to rubble, completely destroying them! The World wouldn't tollerate that, so why should it tollerate Hamas and Hezbollah randomly firing rockets into Israeli villages killing whoever? The Israelis don't randomly bomb civilians like the Palestinians do. Sometimes I think the Israelis should just get out some World War II big cannons, forget the precision smart weapons and just fire round after round into the Gaza Strip. A few rounds come over the border, fire some artillery rounds right back, doesn't matter where they land just chew up the landscape and fire enough rounds so that no one lives there. The problem with the Israelis is that they are too discriminant in their retaliation, instead of firing rocket back when rockets come forth they send in tanks, and helicopters and search out the miscreants that fire those rockets rather than not sweating it like the Palestinians do and just lob some bombs over the border. The Israelis get nothing but criticism for trying to avoid civilian casualities, come to think of it, so do us Americans. In my sarcastic mode, I wonder why we even bother? No one ever holds the Iranians accountable for their terrorism, they even fired some missiles over when George Bush was visiting, maybe we ought to fire some friendly missiles over to their country.

Israel tries to block Gaza to make the people in Gaza resist. It fails. They then punish the entire Gaza community.

The Gaza community should stop hosting Hamas then, shouldn't they? They voted for them after all. So far they've given the Israelis little reason to make peace with them or to accede to their demands. I'm tire of feeling sorry for those little bastards. You try to entertain their ideas about Israeli injustices by giving them some land and they keep on attacking from abandoned Israeli settlements. How long is it going to take and how many missiles have to fly before the Israelis decide the Palestinians don't deserve any of it? You can't make peace with your enemy if he won't stop being your enemy! You would think that would be common sense to most people, yet George Bush still talks about an eventual Palestinian state even as the Palestinians lob missiles at him.

Despite the fact that Hamas isn't affected much. They have smuggling tunnels that go into Egypt. They are getting a steady amount of Israeli fertilisers from Egypt.
A sovereign country has the right to set its own immigration policies. I Palestine ever gets its act together maybe they can too.
Israel has no internationally recognised sovereignty over the West Bank. Yet Russians who have dubious Jewish backgrounds can build a house in the West Bank while Palestinians face the fear of having their house tore down just because they didn't get a permit. Which is next to impossible for an Arab to get.

While other Russians sell missiles and nuclear reactors to those who want to kill their fellow nationals. Why don't the Russians just save themselves the trouble and simply nuke itself decimating its own population of Russians rather than doing so in foreign territories?

Actually Jews continuously occupied the country in varying percentages for thousands of years.
Has a minority.
If you want to blame anyone, blame the British for allowing enough of them in to hold off the the combined armies of 5 Arab states.
I blame the British for backstabbing the Arabs. I also blame them for allowing Jews to immigrate knowing that they wanted to take over the land eventually and not live peacefully with the Arabs.

Why should Great Britian, a Christian country with an official church care about Arab religious beliefs? I don't expect British Soldiers to stand aside while Arab villagers want to stone Christian missionaries who were trying to convert Muslims to their faith. I don't expect British to have any sympathies to intollerant chauvanistic Arabs.

I have no problem with a two state solution. But I don't believe the players in Palestine and the Muslim world in general are going to be happy with that.
Tell that to the nation that is trying to annex West Bank in a fait accompli move.

The Israelis have enough fire power so they don't need to tollerate any Palestinians living in the West Bank or Gaza strip if they don't want to, yet they sit their and pull their punches as various Palestinians fire rocket after rocket killing innocent settlers

Commodore · 2008-05-15 23:43:25

Of course they are going to leave. But we are talking about a war for control of territory. If you lose, you don't get control of the territory.
No it wasn't. It was a war of who would control the nation politically. Up until that point Jews didn't take Arab land they bought it and Arabs didn't take Jewish land. It was a war of who would control the nation politically. Would it be the European Jews who are only there because of their failed integration in Europe or the Arabs who have been there through thick and thin.

Yeah, thats the definition of control of territory, sovereignty, or the right to govern it. The Jews were granted self determination over the lands were they had majority in resolution 181. The Arabs considered the mandate as a majority Arab state. They barely give their own people self determination, I guess its no surprise they violently resist giving it to the Jews.

And whats this about the Jews "failing to integrate"? Are centuries of European Christian bigotry and complete ignorance of their own religious doctrines about the fate of their Savior some how the Jews fault?

Yeah, how's that working out for them?
Actually I meant Fatah. They were supplied and trained with US backing by Egypt and guess what? THEY LOST to Hamas. Apparently Hamas got CIA files that Fatah were keeping on them and other Resistant groups.

Oh I know Hamas used its legislative victories to launched a coup against Abas executive control in Gaza. What I'm asking is how has Gaza improved since Hamas toke over. Cause I suspect its still the same old excuses on how your life sucks because there a Jews within a thousand miles of Jerusalem, and unlike those Zionist collaborators Fatah, Hamas will increase rocket attacks on Jewish shopping malls by 33%.

According to UN numbers, about 770,000 people fled what would become pre-1967 Israel, a population that has now grown to 4 million. Now even if you are going to take the foolish step of giving back land gained in a war of Arab aggression, your not going to give land everything to pop out of a uterus ever since.
If this was 1948 it would have a been a problem since most of them would have been farmers. But this is 2008. Agriculture is left to big companies and rare farmers.

Questions of the lands ability to support the population aside, theres still that pesky issue of the Arabs trying to deny the Jews self-determination with the sword. The Jews fought and won that right. Why would they give it up?

How many settlements does Israel have in Gaza now?
Were do the rockets come from?
Gaza is still controlled by Israel. Everything in Gaza runs to the whim of Israel. Oh and Israel refuses to talk to Hamas. There is the bummer. How can you expect Hamas to stop firing if they haven't signed a truce?

Israel still controls the strip's airspace, territorial water and offshore maritime access, as well as its side of the Gaza-Israeli border. And while I'm sure theres a swarm of UAVs overhead, and a Mossad agent on every other street corner, Israel does not have control over the strip itself. They even gave up control of the Philadelphi Route, which is a narrow strip adjacent to the Strip's border with Egypt to prevent the smuggling of weapons across the border. Thats going well.

So, no, all of Gazas ills are on firmly on the shoulders Hamas now. Which brings us back to the ongoing rocket attacks. Now, if we are suppose to believe that all the Palestinians want is a state to call their own based on the pre 67 borders, and that as far is the land is concerned, Hamas has complete control of the territory, they would have no reason in continue fighting from Gaza and they could go about creating the Arab Islamic utopia dreamed of ever since May 14th, 1948, at least as far they can with the resources in the territory. And you could probably make a legitimate case for making diplomatic efforts to ease the air and sea blockade to bring in additional imports, start trade ect. Hell, if it was the only shots fired in anger, you could justify the shooting down Israeli aircraft in Gazan airspace, and sinking Israeli craft in the Gazan waters. after all, it's what any self respecting sovereign state would do. Ground based attacks could continue against IDF positions and Israeli settlements in the West Bank, cause, afterall, all they want is a state of their own, one that "doesn't look like swiss cheese". Then they wouldn't have to endanger Gazan citizens by launching attacks from there, inviting Israeli counterstrikes.

But for some reason, they persist in indiscriminantly bombarding civilian targets in Israel. It's almost like they are satisfied with Gaza, and seem to show no interest in the West Bank. I wonder why that would be.

Really, cause the only legal difference is the Arabs are not required to serve in the IDF.
Unless you consider merely being less numerous to be discrimination.
Legally. Just like Black people in pre-60s USA were equal blacks. How did black people feel about that? Oh yeah. They hated it and protested for equal rights. Only this time. When Israeli Arabs try to protest they get abuse and one time several kids where shot dead. Their killer hasn't even been punished.

You've never heard of Jim Crow, have you?

In a country as politically diverse as Israel, I'm sure they have the same ambulance chasing legal industry we do. Any legal abuse would not stand.

There is viable analogy to be found there though. I'm sure there is an element of social stigma surrounding someone of an Arab backround, much like those surrounding blacks. As any subset of society certain stereotypes, even if undeserved, stick. Arab Israels die just like Israelis do when Israel is attack though. Radical Islam is by its very nature indiscriminate.

So I suppose he'll be sitting down with Osama next. Youknow, just to get his side of the story.
America must suck if you can make your mind up by listening to one person. Thats probably why hundreds of black men were lynched just because white women accused. I would have thought you guys moved on from that period. I see some habits are to give up.

Actually, our problem, if you want to call it that, is that we are not narcissistic enough to assume we can talk our enemies out of their dangerous ideas. Our enemies are free to have them, and if they threaten us with them they face the full might of the US Armed forces, not a hand full of diplomats convinced to their last breath that the right ego stroking worlds would calm the savage beasts.

Bush made this point to the Knesset today. Obama (this thread was suppose to be about him wasn't it ) and other democrats were dumb enough to admit to the they resemble that remark.

The Israelis sure did. Thats why they are still there.
They are only there because USA and Germany support them. If they didn't have any backings from America. They would have been sanctioned harder then Apartheid South Africa.

Actually, had they lost anyone of their wars, they probably would have met a fate far worst that that of the Palestinians, or worst.

And why shouldn't we support them. They are a fellow democracy and very much a canary on the coal mine. The troubles they face are the struggles we face. The apocalyptic religious theories are overstated.

In case you missed it, the Israelis pulled out of Gaza in 2005 after decades of demands from everyone under the sun. It was suppose to make Israel more secure, and help the Strip be a little less of a third world slum. Many settlements, Israeli settlements, were closed and bulldozed in the West Bank, with plans to do the same for almost all of them. No more settlements, heavy perimeter defense, lots of surviellence.
This is either unintentional mistake or your just lying. I'm going to hope it's the former.
1: Israel pulled out UNILATERALLY. They didn't talk to anyone about it. They just pulled out. Hamas and Fatah fighters went to the Israeli settlements and made sure that the looters didn't take necessary equipment like electrical cables.
2: Olmert was elected on West Bank disengagement. That was the election issue. The platform for Kadima. He has failed to achieve that. After he took down a few settlements he stopped. He built more of them. Which basically negated anything that he has done before. All because a bunch of extremists who harass Palestinian civilians every single day called the soldiers Nazis.
3: There are no plans to get rid of settlements in West Bank. In fact the Plan so far is to steal has much Arab land in the West Bank has possible through the Israeli Apartheid wall. If Israel was serious about pulling out. The Pre-67 border would be have been adhered to.
A good example of how Israel isn't being honest is to look at America. Parts of the American border wall were accidentally built into Mexican territory. It was only a few feet. Not much to make the Mexicans upset but the entire part of the wall which was on the Mexican side was torn down and built on the American side. That cost millions.

Why exactly does it matter how Israel left Gaza? Do you really expect Israel to leave the keys under the doormat and mints under the pillows? It effectively removes all excuses from the Palestinian playbook, and lets them wallow in their filth for a while. There may have been a time after 67 when Israel thought of properly annexing the territories, but they didn't, using them instead as a buffer against further aggression. Without a permanent use for the land, it became a political bargaining chip.

As for Olmert, any dreams he may have had for continuing Sharons Kadima platform died in the hills of Southern Lebanon in 2006. On of the nasty side effects of the parliamentary system is that you have to make deals with minorities that really shouldn't be in power. I'm sure he's had to shelve Kadima, if not go against it just to stay in power and hope that after a few years he can try again.

The problem with it that those who gain power in vacuum that disengagement leaves are far harder to kick out, but at least they show their true true colors.

Yet for some reason there are still daily rocket attacks on villages in southern Israel. Gaza is still a slum. Hamas spends all their time fortifying the place and teaching children things about Jews that would make Hitler blush. Theres a couple lessons to be learned from this, things that were known before hand and screamed from the mountain tops to anyone who would listen (no one did apparently), mainly, don't give anything to terrorists, and terrorist won't be happy until all the jews are out of the entire British mandate.
Thats an exaggeration. Hitler would have never blushed at what Hamas does. Probably laugh at the way some of the kidds mascot always end up being killed by Israelis,Israeli actions or Fatah. Other then that I don't see anything that would stand up to reason. Hamas and Israel haven't signed a peace deal or a truce. Why should Hamas stop? There is nothing obligating them. Israel tries to block Gaza to make the people in Gaza resist. It fails. They then punish the entire Gaza community. Despite the fact that Hamas isn't affected much. They have smuggling tunnels that go into Egypt. They are getting a steady amount of Israeli fertilisers from Egypt.

Common sense should tell them to stop, or at least shift to the West Bank were voilence can at least be slightly more justified.

But Islamic facistists never were the logical type.

A sovereign country has the right to set its own immigration policies. I Palestine ever gets its act together maybe they can too.
Israel has no internationally recognised sovereignty over the West Bank. Yet Russians who have dubious Jewish backgrounds can build a house in the West Bank while Palestinians face the fear of having their house tore down just because they didn't get a permit. Which is next to impossible for an Arab to get.

Well Israel has a few options. Annex the territories, and grant citizenship to the Palestinians, and commit Harry Carry, annex and kick everyone out, and wait for the next attack, leave completely, and wait while the terrorists assemble forces to push on the attack, or continue the dance they are in until international nation building force is brought to bear and a proper state is established.

In the mean time they have the land to use as a domestic political football.

If you want to blame anyone, blame the British for allowing enough of them in to hold off the the combined armies of 5 Arab states.
I blame the British for backstabbing the Arabs. I also blame them for allowing Jews to immigrate knowing that they wanted to take over the land eventually and not live peacefully with the Arabs.

Define peaceably?

Cause if it would involve anything the Arabs do to each other when they have self rule, I wouldn't want any part of it either.

I have no problem with a two state solution. But I don't believe the players in Palestine and the Muslim world in general are going to be happy with that.
Tell that to the nation that is trying to annex West Bank in a fait accompli move.

What would annexation accomplish? They would have to either kick everyone out, which wouldn't solve the greater conflict cause it would disablize surrounding states who have no love for Palestinians, or grant citizenship and commit demographical suicide.

Tom Kalbfus · 2008-05-16 08:59:31

I think that those that fight and those that support terrorism, should be removed from the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and after that, we'll see whose left.

I think that terrorist supporters, terrorists, and Hamas should be the "boat people", they should be made into stateless refugees because of their acts, if that is most of the Palestinians, then so be it.

As I define it a terrorist supporter is:
Anyone who voted for Hamas.
Anyone who let terrorists into their buildings to let them fire their Kassam rockets at innocent civilians.
Anyone who cheers the murder of innocent civilians.
Anyone who knowingly gives aid and comfort to a terrorist, protects him from apprehension or demonstrates for a terrorist's release.

Remove all those people from the West Bank and Gaza strip and permanently bar them from returning and Israel should get along with its new Palestinian neighbors swimmingly.

Gregori · 2008-05-16 09:54:48

I think that those that fight and those that support terrorism, should be removed from the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and after that, we'll see whose left.
I think that terrorist supporters, terrorists, and Hamas should be the "boat people", they should be made into stateless refugees because of their acts, if that is most of the Palestinians, then so be it.
As I define it a terrorist supporter is:
Anyone who voted for Hamas.
Anyone who let terrorists into their buildings to let them fire their Kassam rockets at innocent civilians.
Anyone who cheers the murder of innocent civilians.
Anyone who knowingly gives aid and comfort to a terrorist, protects him from apprehension or demonstrates for a terrorist's release.
Remove all those people from the West Bank and Gaza strip and permanently bar them from returning and Israel should get along with its new Palestinian neighbors swimmingly.

Your definition of 'terrorist' supporter would likely have you kicked out of your own country. After all, you probably voted for succesive goverments who's actions caused the deaths of 100 000's of civilians world wide. Your tax money pays for it etc etc

But I realise that oppression, genocide, racism, forced evictions, bombings and abductions are not a solution.

I would take slightly more inspiration from the Northern Ireland Peace Process. That didn't use violence and opression, but allowed the various factions to come to a non-violent solution.

It didn't ask the groups involved to get rid off their ideologies (Unionist still want to be a part of Britain, Nationalists still want a 32 county republic), just put them on hold whilst more practical goals are achieved without violence.

If peace and stable goverment means negotiating with terrorists, so be it.

Both sides are going to have to make sacrifices and do things they won't like, but thats life.

(btw, I don't think it was too inspiring that US-Israel punished palestinian for their democratic choice - its a bit rich to trumpet democracy and then oppose it when they pick someone we don't like.)

Stormrage · 2008-05-16 16:32:17

How about morality? How about that killing is wrong? They are killing innocent people, not people that have done them any harm! How would the World fell if Israel started randomly killing innocent Palestinians,

Well considering that Israel HAS done it and the reaction to it was just a simple outrage and then ignoring it. I would say morality isn't a question here. Just who your friends are. Israel would never have been allowed to get with the war crimes if America wasn't protecting them.

they would just carpet bomb whole Palestinian villages, towns and cities reducing the whole thing to rubble, completely destroying them!

Isn't that what they did in Lebanon? They couldn't find the captured Israeli Soldiers so they randomly bombed Lebanese towns. Bush and Blair were protecting Israel in the UN. In fact a remember a famous quote a british journalist asked our prime minster.
"Can I be clear prime minster what your message is to Israel. Stop now! Because has you said what is happening is a catastrophe or Is your message carry on until this international plan is developed."

This was at the height of the Israeli bombardment of Lebanon. Bombings that served no strategic or morale purposes.

The World wouldn't tollerate that,

It clearly did.

No one ever holds the Iranians accountable for their terrorism, they even fired some missiles over when George Bush was visiting, maybe we ought to fire some friendly missiles over to their country.

How about the fact that no one helds the US responsible for it's actions. USA and the UK invaded Iraq a sovereign nation and faced no consequence. TWO world wars were started because two useless good for nothing European countries that no one has ever heard of were invaded. But suddenly what Happens in the Middle East is different? USA along with the UK started a coup against a legitimate Iranian government and forced the Iranian people to suffer for years under the Shah. When the Iranians removed him USA sanctioned them. They had to learn the hard way like the Cubans did. Brown skinned people aren't allowed to change dictators unless approved by USA or the UK.

The Gaza community should stop hosting Hamas then, shouldn't they?

Kinda hard when all the of the guns belong to Hamas. Got any better ideas? Global warming can be solved by not breathing out Carbon Dioxide?

While other Russians sell missiles and nuclear reactors to those who want to kill their fellow nationals. Why don't the Russians just save themselves the trouble and simply nuke itself decimating its own population of Russians rather than doing so in foreign territories?

Notice how he never answered any of my points. Just focused on the Russians. Russians who were invited in an immigration scheme to make the Arabs are permanent minority. There is international laws against that.

Why should Great Britian, a Christian country with an official church care about Arab religious beliefs? I don't expect British Soldiers to stand aside while Arab villagers want to stone Christian missionaries who were trying to convert Muslims to their faith. I don't expect British to have any sympathies to intollerant chauvanistic Arabs.

Why should they? Because It was the Arabs that helped them defeat the Turks. It was the Arabs they promised would be allowed to live free. It was the Arabs who died to fight in a war didn't actually concern them much. It was the Arabs who were the only Allied fighters to end up worse after winning the war then before when they were under Central Power occupation.

And whats this about the Jews "failing to integrate"? Are centuries of European Christian bigotry and complete ignorance of their own religious doctrines about the fate of their Savior some how the Jews fault?

Prior to the Holocaust. The Jews who championed Zionism were the same ones who were championing integration. They were secular jews. When they realised that Europeans didn't like them they decided to move out. Apparently Kenya wasn't suitable because the local Africans living there wouldn't take it to nicely if they came and took it over. So the Arabs had to suffer. Instead of integrating with the Arabs like the Middle Eastern cousin they deluded themselves that they were superior to the Arabs and the Arab would appreciate being led by people with better culture.

Oh I know Hamas used its legislative victories to launched a coup against Abas executive control in Gaza.

No you don't. It was Fatah that tried to launch a coup. Don't try to say otherwise. There are leaked documents.

What I'm asking is how has Gaza improved since Hamas toke over. Cause I suspect its still the same old excuses on how your life sucks because there a Jews within a thousand miles of Jerusalem, and unlike those Zionist collaborators Fatah, Hamas will increase rocket attacks on Jewish shopping malls by 33%.

Oh thats a terrible tactic. How obvious and sad. That would have only worked if the state of Gaza was the same before Hamas took over. Well we all know it's not. Before Hamas even took a single political action their budget was gone.

Questions of the lands ability to support the population aside, theres still that pesky issue of the Arabs trying to deny the Jews self-determination with the sword. The Jews fought and won that right. Why would they give it up?

In case you haven't noticed. The Conflict is still ongoing. All though I have to mention that Israel has had the luck of being given billions by USA and high tech military equipment by France,Germany and USA. Give the Palestinians the same including training and lets see who would win.

Israel still controls the strip's airspace, territorial water and offshore maritime access, as well as its side of the Gaza-Israeli border. And while I'm sure theres a swarm of UAVs overhead, and a Mossad agent on every other street corner, Israel does not have control over the strip itself. They even gave up control of the Philadelphi Route, which is a narrow strip adjacent to the Strip's border with Egypt to prevent the smuggling of weapons across the border. Thats going well.

You don't call that control of Gaza? Because thats what it sounds like.

So, no, all of Gazas ills are on firmly on the shoulders Hamas now.

How? Give me an example of one thing that Hamas has done wrong. That isn't related to the Israeli Blockade or the loss of AID money that the PA has been getting for years.

Which brings us back to the ongoing rocket attacks. Now, if we are suppose to believe that all the Palestinians want is a state to call their own based on the pre 67 borders, and that as far is the land is concerned, Hamas has complete control of the territory, they would have no reason in continue fighting from Gaza and they could go about creating the Arab Islamic utopia dreamed of ever since May 14th, 1948, at least as far they can with the resources in the territory. And you could probably make a legitimate case for making diplomatic efforts to ease the air and sea blockade to bring in additional imports, start trade ect. Hell, if it was the only shots fired in anger, you could justify the shooting down Israeli aircraft in Gazan airspace, and sinking Israeli craft in the Gazan waters. after all, it's what any self respecting sovereign state would do. Ground based attacks could continue against IDF positions and Israeli settlements in the West Bank, cause, afterall, all they want is a state of their own, one that "doesn't look like swiss cheese". Then they wouldn't have to endanger Gazan citizens by launching attacks from there, inviting Israeli counterstrikes.

1: The conflict is on going. It never ended. Unlike you Palestinians see Gaza has a part of Palestine. Which means that the occupation of West Bank is still in play.
2: No truce or agreement that Hamas would stop firing.
3: It's impossible for Hamas to do anything until they get access to money and the Gazans are allowed to trade with the outside world. Only a fool would think that it's possible to build a good economy within a nation alone.

Radical Islam is by its very nature indiscriminate.

Indiscriminate in loving good people and hating bad people.

Actually, our problem, if you want to call it that, is that we are not narcissistic enough to assume we can talk our enemies out of their dangerous ideas. Our enemies are free to have them, and if they threaten us with them they face the full might of the US Armed forces, not a hand full of diplomats convinced to their last breath that the right ego stroking worlds would calm the savage beasts.
Bush made this point to the Knesset today. Obama (this thread was suppose to be about him wasn't it Razz ) and other democrats were dumb enough to admit to the they resemble that remark.

Nope. Your problem is that you know what the right solution is. You never get anywhere if you don't hear both sides of the story. But are afraid that you will be seen has weak. So you cling on to a position that is stupid and pointless.

Look at McCain. He was for talking to Hamas. Hamas hasn't changed from 2006 and 2008. It's still the same group with the same tactics. Now that he is a nominee he's a hardass. Because he doesn't want to appear weak.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09ATuxuebh0.

THATS RIGHT. MCCAIN WANTS TO TALK TO HAMAS.

I made it big so that nobody would miss it. This is a big post.

Actually, had they lost anyone of their wars, they probably would have met a fate far worst that that of the Palestinians, or worst.

No they wouldn't. Germany and USA would sit by and watch Israel get defeated.

And why shouldn't we support them. They are a fellow democracy and very much a canary on the coal mine. The troubles they face are the struggles we face. The apocalyptic religious theories are overstated.

Why shouldn't you support them? How about the fact that they cause their own troubles? They claim they want peace yet don't listen to the international law. They are trying to annex the West Bank. They are making the lives of Palestinians in the West Bank unnecessarily difficult. They are making the lives of Gazans unnecessarily difficult. If they were serious about peace they wouldn't be building settlements and land stealing walls. If you support them then you support their actions.

Why exactly does it matter how Israel left Gaza? Do you really expect Israel to leave the keys under the doormat and mints under the pillows? It effectively removes all excuses from the Palestinian playbook, and lets them wallow in their filth for a while. There may have been a time after 67 when Israel thought of properly annexing the territories, but they didn't, using them instead as a buffer against further aggression. Without a permanent use for the land, it became a political bargaining chip.

WTF? Why does it matter? Well lets see. If the Police are after you because you stole an iPod and you give back the earphones. Do you think they would let you go?

As for Olmert, any dreams he may have had for continuing Sharons Kadima platform died in the hills of Southern Lebanon in 2006. On of the nasty side effects of the parliamentary system is that you have to make deals with minorities that really shouldn't be in power. I'm sure he's had to shelve Kadima, if not go against it just to stay in power and hope that after a few years he can try again.
The problem with it that those who gain power in vacuum that disengagement leaves are far harder to kick out, but at least they show their true true colors.

Nope. The West Bank pull out stalled long before Hezbollah got the idea to kidnap soldiers. The pull out when Sharon came out with it wasn't even sincere. It was symbolic action that left large and numerous amount of settlement in the Bank. What Olmert did was just take the piss. He's to scared of nervous polls.

Common sense should tell them to stop, or at least shift to the West Bank were voilence can at least be slightly more justified.
But Islamic facistists never were the logical type.

I think you mean Neo-con are never logical. When Hamas were elected Israel pressured the world to stop financing the PA budget and refused to give to Hamas the Taxes they take from Palestinians who have to cross checkpoints. Hamas voted to allow Abbas to negiogate with Israel and Israel kept on refusing. Common sense says that Israel was never serious.

Well Israel has a few options. Annex the territories, and grant citizenship to the Palestinians, and commit Harry Carry, annex and kick everyone out, and wait for the next attack, leave completely, and wait while the terrorists assemble forces to push on the attack, or continue the dance they are in until international nation building force is brought to bear and a proper state is established.
In the mean time they have the land to use as a domestic political football.

Or have talks with the legitimate Palestinian government (Hamas). Thats what most serious nations would do.

Define peaceably?
Cause if it would involve anything the Arabs do to each other when they have self rule, I wouldn't want any part of it either.

Peacefully? How about the way the Jews in Palestine lived during Arab and Ottoman rule? Thats right. Before arrogant/racist European Jews came to Palestine. Jews were living in Palestine with their Arab neighbourhoods side by side without plans to take over and subjugate the Arabs. Until their European cousins came uninvited.

What would annexation accomplish? They would have to either kick everyone out, which wouldn't solve the greater conflict cause it would disablize surrounding states who have no love for Palestinians, or grant citizenship and commit demographical suicide.

Ask the Israelis not me. They seem hell bent on Giving Abbas a swiss cheese of a West Bank. Where the Palestinians aren't allowed to use roads that the settlers use meaning you would end up with several bantustans in the West Bank.

I think that those that fight and those that support terrorism, should be removed from the West Bank and Gaza Strip, and after that, we'll see whose left.

I think anyone who willfully accepts and supports the deaths of innocents and the breaking of international laws should be kicked out of their country and put in a tiny boat in the middle of the ocean.

Commodore · 2008-05-17 20:15:08

Look at McCain. He was for talking to Hamas. Hamas hasn't changed from 2006 and 2008. It's still the same group with the same tactics. Now that he is a nominee he's a hardass. Because he doesn't want to appear weak.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09ATuxuebh0
THATS RIGHT. MCCAIN WANTS TO TALK TO HAMAS.

I made it big so that nobody would miss it. This is a big post.

If thats your ace in the hole, go home, Seriously.

Theres a big difference between Obamas face to face, no preconditions, chief executive to chief executive chit chats, and were going to have to deal with them one way or the other.

You can catch McCain on a lot of things. This ain't one of them

Gregori · 2008-05-17 21:33:45

Look at McCain. He was for talking to Hamas. Hamas hasn't changed from 2006 and 2008. It's still the same group with the same tactics. Now that he is a nominee he's a hardass. Because he doesn't want to appear weak.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09ATuxuebh0
THATS RIGHT. MCCAIN WANTS TO TALK TO HAMAS.

I made it big so that nobody would miss it. This is a big post.

If thats your ace in the hole, go home, Seriously.
Theres a big difference between Obamas face to face, no preconditions, chief executive to chief executive chit chats, and were going to have to deal with them one way or the other.
You can catch McCain on a lot of things. This ain't one of them

Yeah, What difference?

If there is going to be peace in the Middle East, somebody is going to have to negotiate with Hamas. Otherwise, we'll hear months of murder and mayhem on the news. Hamas were democratically elected by the Palestinian people and their choice should be respected whether we like it or not. If we're going to promote democracy in the middle east, we can't just punish entire countries for their democratic choices.

Jimmy Carter made brave and great steps in this direction. He doing what the US and Israeli goverments should be doing right now.

Once again, I think great lessons can be learned from the Northern Ireland peace process.

Stormrage · 2008-05-18 03:46:37

Look at McCain. He was for talking to Hamas. Hamas hasn't changed from 2006 and 2008. It's still the same group with the same tactics. Now that he is a nominee he's a hardass. Because he doesn't want to appear weak.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=09ATuxuebh0
THATS RIGHT. MCCAIN WANTS TO TALK TO HAMAS.

I made it big so that nobody would miss it. This is a big post.

If thats your ace in the hole, go home, Seriously.
Theres a big difference between Obamas face to face, no preconditions, chief executive to chief executive chit chats, and were going to have to deal with them one way or the other.
You can catch McCain on a lot of things. This ain't one of them

Nope. Obama wanted to talk to a head of state of an another country accused of something that has never been proven. McCain wanted to talk to a group listed has terrorists by the European and American governments. Suddenly he wants to become president and he changes his tune. I thought the gas break and Al-Qaeda being trained in Iran gaffes were evidence of him being just another idiot politician who panders to what people want not need, but him going 180 on Hamas is.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#76 2008-05-11 10:54:24

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#77 2008-05-11 12:46:33

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#78 2008-05-11 15:23:34

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#79 2008-05-11 22:53:12

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#80 2008-05-12 04:02:19

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#81 2008-05-12 13:45:55

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#82 2008-05-12 18:25:39

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#83 2008-05-13 07:47:28

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#84 2008-05-13 09:09:22

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#85 2008-05-13 09:15:16

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#86 2008-05-13 16:08:20

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#87 2008-05-13 21:21:24

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#88 2008-05-14 05:30:09

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#89 2008-05-14 08:04:05

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#90 2008-05-14 11:06:21

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#91 2008-05-14 11:43:28

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#92 2008-05-15 08:02:59

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#93 2008-05-15 10:25:42

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#94 2008-05-15 23:43:25

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#95 2008-05-16 08:59:31

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#96 2008-05-16 09:54:48

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#97 2008-05-16 16:32:17

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#98 2008-05-17 20:15:08

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#99 2008-05-17 21:33:45

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

#100 2008-05-18 03:46:37

Re: The Flag that Barack Obama won't wear

Board footer