With respect to the Palestinians, what I think is that they are unreasonable (to put it lightly). What I think is that they need to accept that they have lost the struggle and that to continue it at this point will make life worse for them and everyone else.

There may well have been some sort of strategy behind the resumption of the Intifada, once upon a time, but any semblance of a plan is long since gone, and the Palestinians are locked in a negative feedback loop of attacks and response that does nothing except make everyone miserable. There are no leaders who can stop it, because if the violence was not aimed at Israel then it would be aimed internally at other Palestinians. If any Palestinian leader now were to actually try to stop the suicide attacks, either he'd be murdered or else it would set off a Palestinian civil war.

It is cultural insanity. There are people among the Palestinians whose power derives from the struggle, who cannot give it up. There is no central control. They are locked in anarchy. There is a self-sustaining culture of hate now, where anyone advocating moderation is in danger of being dragged into the street and brutally murdered.

A half a loaf is better than none at all, and it's time for the Palestinians to give up on trying to push Israel into the sea and accept that Israel isn't going to be destroyed. I don't give a damn whether the deal they accept is "just" by anyone's standards; when you're the underdog you take what you can get, and right now that's their situation. What they think they want isn't possible. What is possible (or, at least, what was possible before the Intifada) was a hell of a lot better than what they've got now.

And what I think is that they won't accept that until we've occupied Iraq and destabilized Syria and Saudi Arabia and there's been a revolution in Iran and Libya has read the writing on the wall and the EU finally admits that it's been financing terrorist attacks and stops giving the Palestinians money to use as they wish, and the Palestinians suddenly find that they have no friends left. Oh, and after Arafat dies or is killed or is forced into retirement, and a few other changes such as a forced cutoff of all financial support from the Arab nations. Until that happens, they will continue their useless struggle, killing and destroying to no one's benefit, with no principle to establish and no hope of prevailing.

But once those things have happened, the Palestinians may lose heart, and then it will be possible to cut a deal with them. Isolated and alone, with no friends and the flow of money cut off and no more friendly neighbors to smuggle in weapons, maybe individual Palestinians may come to realize that what they want is actually impossible, and realize that they will have to settle for less. But until that happens, the Palestinian runaway train will continue to barrel down the track towards oblivion, with no one at the controls but a lot of people falling under the wheels. The Palestinians and the Israelis will continue to bleed for perhaps another two years.

That's what I think.

But increasingly I'm finding myself feeling as if the world would be better off if someone went in and shot every damned one of them and piled the lot in an unmarked grave. After reading about yet another Palestinian atrocity, I find myself thinking, "Nuke Ramallah. Then nuke Nablus. And if that doesn't help, bulldoze Gaza. And once that's done, put all fifty surviving Palestinians on a freighter, tow it out to sea, and let them become someone else's problem."

I know that's wrong. I know it could never happen, and that it will never happen, and that it should never happen, and I would never actually advocate anything like that. But what I'm finding is that every time I read about a Palestinian being killed by the Israelis, my first emotional reaction is, "Good riddance." I've reached the point where I feel nothing at all when I read about them dying. I have reached the point where I don't care at all, not even slightly, about their pain and hardship. They have ceased to be persons to me. I'm no longer even interested in hearing their side of the story.

Sometimes I read about someone's death, someone I don't know, someone far away, someone from a different country and different culture, I find myself grieving a bit; I can imagine them as a real person, and I mourn the loss of something valuable and important. I don't do that for Palestinians anymore. Emotionally, I no longer think of Palestinians as "valuable and important".

I shouldn't feel that way. I know that. But the well of sympathy I have for the plight of the Palestinians ran dry a long time ago, mostly because I know that their dire situation now is mostly their own doing, caused by their idiotic and pig-headed insistence that somehow they can return to 1947, and their embrace of what truly amounts to a culture-wide death wish. I know I should understand that they are people, but I find myself now thinking of them only as a scourge.

Others have argued that the deal offered to the Palestinians by Barak wasn't "fair". Even the sweetened deal, which Arafat ultimately turned down, wasn't "fair". I don't give a shit.

What I think is that diplomacy has never had anything to do with "fair". Diplomacy has always been about "strong". Like it or not, that's how the world works. When you're weak, you have to accept the best deal you can get, even if you think it's still "unfair", unless you have a cultural death-wish. And it seems as if they do.

If the only deal you can get is absolutely intolerable, then you turn it down. But even though the best deal the Palestinians could get wasn't as good as they might have liked, it was not intolerable, by any rational evaluation.

But the Palestinians haven't been rational for a hell of a long time. The reality is that the Palestinians are now embarked on a genocidal war. Their goal is to kill all the Israelis; the only reason they haven't done so is that they don't have the means. (If they had a nuke, Tel Aviv would have disappeared a long time ago.)

"Death before dishonor" is one thing. But "Death, just because" is something else.

It really is a question of the extent to which we should strive to protect them from themselves and their own urge to self-destruction, and how much sacrifice we should make to give them a better life which they themselves don't seem to want. Oh, they have a vision of a better life alright, but it's a delusion and they can only get what they truly want through the eradication of Israel as a nation. If, as a group, they wanted peace and a significant improvement in their situation and were actually willing to accept the continued existence of Israel, they could have peace right now. If there was a Palestinian consensus to really deal, to really end the war, it could happen in six months. But when you face a people who seem to embrace self-destruction and monomaniacally seek it, individually and collectively, do you ever reach a point where you should oblige them? When you face a group which seeks genocide, does reactive genocide become more acceptable?

I suppose not, but as time goes on it is harder and harder for me to tell myself that it is the wrong answer. In any war, there is one way to positively settle the issue, and that's for everyone on one side of it to die. Whatever else you might say about that, it is at least a final solution.


Moderator Edit – profanity

It's just not a practical one.

:m: Peace.

so you believe to settle a conflict, all of one side should be killed? Sigh. What crap do they teach you children over there. When I see a kid like you Kyle it really bothers me that one day you children will be running the world. Let's hope that your view points never become part of what makes this world tick. You seem like a very angry kid with little understanding. State educated?:D

Originally posted by RichardJA
so you believe to settle a conflict, all of one side should be killed? Sigh. What crap do they teach you children over there. When I see a kid like you Kyle it really bothers me that one day you children will be running the world. Let's hope that your view points never become part of what makes this world tick. You seem like a very angry kid with little understanding. State educated?:D Read->Comprehend->Post

Hey Kyle, can you compress it a little bit?

Then again, it looks the size of the average post in the religion forum.:D

A half a loaf is better than none at all

I don't believe any group/race will ever accept that. It's funny how everyone wants to be treated with dignity, and how they fight to the death when they aren't treated as such.

When you're weak, you have to accept the best deal you can get, even if you think it's still "unfair"

Early American settlers should've given in to the British, then. Britain would've liked your idea.

Now, what if Britain really wanted America? We'd probably still be fighting for it now, just as Israel is trying to fight for the land they claimed from Palestine. Obviously, Palestine really wants the land Israel took.

With respect to the Palestinians, what I think is that they are unreasonable (to put it lightly). What I think is that they need to accept that they have lost the struggle and that to continue it at this point will make life worse for them and everyone else.

1) It was the Palestinians' land first.
2) A small part of it was taken by the UN and given to the Israelites last century, and since then the Israelites have expanded and taken more and more of Palestine, which they occupy by military force.
3) Israel is a terrorist state, having killed over 1,400 Palestinian civilians in the past two years.

Given these things, how can you justify saying the Palestinians are being unreasonable?


... and the Palestinians are locked in a negative feedback loop of attacks and response that does nothing except make everyone miserable.

I think Israel is playing a huge part in making everyone there miserable.


There are no leaders who can stop it, because if the violence was not aimed at Israel then it would be aimed internally at other Palestinians. If any Palestinian leader now were to actually try to stop the suicide attacks, either he'd be murdered or else it would set off a Palestinian civil war.

Here you are correct, in that it is not Yasser Arafat behind those attacks. It is small groups of individuals, guerillas, not attached to any state. On the other side, however, the Israeli Defence Force is state owned and operated and is killing hundreds of civilians.


It is cultural insanity.

Not really. There is a very small minority of Palestinian nutters doing those attacks. Most of them are just ordinary people who see their country occupied by invading Israelis, who kill hundreds of Palestinians every year.


A half a loaf is better than none at all, and it's time for the Palestinians to give up on trying to push Israel into the sea and accept that Israel isn't going to be destroyed.

Actually, the way the world is going now, I fully expect a coalition of local Arab nations to join together, call themselves a "coalition against terror", and gather their forces to wipe Israel off the map. And I also expect Israel to launch nukes in retaliation. The USA's efforts right now, combined with Israel's constant killing of civilians, is polarising things to the extent that I find this very likely.


I don't give a damn whether the deal they accept is "just" by anyone's standards; when you're the underdog you take what you can get, and right now that's their situation.

So you disapprove of the French resistance fighting the NAZIs? When you're the underdog, you fight for your freedom. You don't accept your crappy situation.


What they think they want isn't possible.

I find it very possible. And likely. Israel only survives right now through military activity.


... and the EU finally admits that it's been financing terrorist attacks ...

Do you wear a tinfoil cap? Is the evil United Nations beaming thoughts into your head from the television static?


... and stops giving the Palestinians money to use as they wish...

The EU gave Yasser thirty billion dollars or some huge amount, yes. Germany gives Israel money every year, which Israel uses to kill Palestinian civilians - that is terrorism. The USA gives Israel money and weapons, which it uses to kill Palestinian civilians - that is terrorism.


... and the Palestinians suddenly find that they have no friends left.

Palestine is gaining more and more friends every year.


Isolated and alone, with no friends and the flow of money cut off and no more friendly neighbors to smuggle in weapons,

They have the EU, Arab states all around, sea access, and more nations every year gaining sympathy for them. Why would they be cut off and alone?


But increasingly I'm finding myself feeling as if the world would be better off if someone went in and shot every damned one of them and piled the lot in an unmarked grave. After reading about yet another Palestinian atrocity, I find myself thinking, "Nuke Ramallah. Then nuke Nablus. And if that doesn't help, bulldoze Gaza. And once that's done, put all fifty surviving Palestinians on a freighter, tow it out to sea, and let them become someone else's problem."

You are a complete psycho. A raving nutter. I'm glad you're not my countryman. Your eagerness for death on a massive scale, combined with your complete lack of knowledge of what's going on in the world, make you a disturbing little monkey.


But what I'm finding is that every time I read about a Palestinian being killed by the Israelis, my first emotional reaction is, "Good riddance."

That's because you are an uneducated, emotionally-retarded buffoon.


I've reached the point where I feel nothing at all when I read about them dying. I have reached the point where I don't care at all, not even slightly, about their pain and hardship. They have ceased to be persons to me. I'm no longer even interested in hearing their side of the story.

You have lost any and all chance of ever being more than a sub-human monkey in my eyes. I hope you find yourself at the mercy of people who see you in exactly the same way.

1) It was the Palestinians' land first.
Some of it, large parts were owned and lived on by Jews at the time Isreal was created.

2) A small part of it was taken by the UN and given to the Israelites last century, and since then the Israelites have expanded and taken more and more of Palestine, which they occupy by military force.
Yes, after being repeatedly attacked over their short history by other Arab countries and terrorist groups.

Given these things, how can you justify saying the Palestinians are being unreasonable?
Killing women and children is always unreasonable. ON BOTH SIDES.

So you disapprove of the French resistance fighting the NAZIs? When you're the underdog, you fight for your freedom. You don't accept your crappy situation.
Very different. The entire country of France was occupied so Germany could control Europe. The French Resistance attacked back by attacking the Nazis and infrastructure. They never bombed civilians or schools or restaurants full of teens and students.

You have lost any and all chance of ever being more than a sub-human monkey in my eyes. I hope you find yourself at the mercy of people who see you in exactly the same way.
Through your personal attacks and by believing that the Palestinian terror attacks are justified, you, yourself, are really no different. You support large scale death. You are worse than him, you are a hypocrite.

Some of it, large parts were owned and lived on by Jews at the time Isreal was created.

I'm talking about waaaay back. Of those two groups, Palestinians and Israelites, the Palestinians have the prior claim.


Israelites, a Semitic people, apparently of nomadic origin, whose emergence in the Levant is identified with a shift of settlement at the start if the Iron Age (c. 1200 bc), when a new pattern of small villages dispersed in upland regions replaced the urban life of the Bronze Age. Explanations for this process range from the nomadic invasion thesis (derived from Biblical accounts in Exodus) to settlement of indigenous populations of nomads and brigands, to social revolution by the urban lower classes at the end of the Bronze Age. The Israelites' conquest of areas occupied by the Canaanites brought them into an ultimately successful conflict with the Philistines. The major building works carried out under the united kingdom belong to the reign of Solomon. The northern kingdom of Israel (see Samaria) was conquered by the Assyrians in the late 8th century BC, while the southern kingdom of Judah was reduced by the Babylonians in the early 6th century BC. See also Jerusalem.

Jerusalem, a city in the Judaean hills, Israel, which has been occupied for thousands of years and which has been excavated virtually continuously since the 1860s. Comparatively little remains of ancient Jerusalem, chiefly because of the repeated destructions suffered by the city (e.g. that of Titus in 70 AD) and later Byzantine and Islamic overbuilding. The first major construction at Jerusalem seems to have been the stone fortifications of the late Bronze Age. Jerusalem was captured by the Israelites under Davin in c.996 BC and extended to the north by Solomon, who built a temple and palace in an area later overbuilt by the Herodian temple platform, and by Hezekiah, whose water tunnel is still visible. Jerusalem was patronised by the Byzantine emperors beause of its Christian associations and by Islamic caliphs as a holy city. Most of the walls to be seen at Jerusalem are the work of Suleiman the Magnificent (1538-41 AD) on top of Herodian and Roman foundations, while the octagonal 'Dome of the Rock' (685-692 AD) is the most striking of the Islamic buildings in Jerusalem.

Canaanites, an ethnic group identified with the sophisticated urban civilisation of the Levant during the Bronze Age (see Hazor, Jericho, Lachish, Beit Mersim). The Canaanites were dislodged from much of their territory by the Israelites and Philistines, but much of their culture persisted among the Phoenicians.

Phoenicians, a Semitic people, the cultural heirs of the Canaanites, who flourished as traders from their ports of Byblos, Sidon, and Tyre during the 1st millennium BC. They are credited with the founding of Carthage and the invention of the alphabet.

Philistines, one of the Sea Peoples whose occupation of southern Palestine marks the beginning of the Iron Age in that region. The five chief cities of the Philistines (the 'Pentapolis') were Ashkelon, Ashdod, Gaza, Gath, and Ekron.



Yes, after being repeatedly attacked over their short history by other Arab countries and terrorist groups.

Ah, I guess that makes it ok then...


Killing women and children is always unreasonable. ON BOTH SIDES.

I absolutely agree.


Very different. The entire country of France was occupied so Germany could control Europe. The French Resistance attacked back by attacking the Nazis and infrastructure. They never bombed civilians or schools or restaurants full of teens and students.

I'd be very surprised if the French resistance never bombed any civilians.


Through your personal attacks and by believing that the Palestinian terror attacks are justified, you, yourself, are really no different.

I don't support "terror attacks". I do not support any sttacks against civilians. Either quote me saying that I do, or go hide in a hole.


You support large scale death.

Where the heck do you get that idea, monkeyboy? Again, quote me saying as much, or go away.


You are worse than him, you are a hypocrite.

And yet again, demonstrate it, support your claim, or go away.

Originally posted by Adam
1) It was the Palestinians' land first.

Actually, it was the Jewish peoples land first. Jews have been there since Moses led the 13 tribes from Egypt; since the people of Abraham (Jewish people) settled Palestine. It was also controlled by England immediately before the creation of Israel in 1948.
[QUOTE]
2) A small part of it was taken by the UN and given to the Israelites last century, and since then the Israelites have expanded and taken more and more of Palestine, which they occupy by military force.

Israel has only been occuplying lands that it has needed to protect herself. Remember, it was the Arabs who have always been the aggressor and Israel has always had to defend herself. If the Arab states would make peace with Israel and accept her right to exist then Israel not have the same need for protection.

[quote]3) Israel is a terrorist state, having killed over 1,400 Palestinian civilians in the past two years.

Israel is not the one who has been sending suicide bombers to kill innocent children. Israel is not the one that puposely attacks civilian targets. Israel is not the one that is actively funding gorups that are listed by the U.S. government as terrorist organizations. Israel is not the one that decided terror was a legitimate means of negotiations. This was all done by the Palestinan people, the Palestinian Authority, and Arafat.

Given these things, how can you justify saying the Palestinians are being unreasonable?


I think Israel is playing a huge part in making everyone there miserable.


[quote]Here you are correct, in that it is not Yasser Arafat behind those attacks. It is small groups of individuals, guerillas, not attached to any state. On the other side, however, the Israeli Defence Force is state owned and operated and is killing hundreds of civilians.
Arafat and the Palestinian Authority (PA) are funding the suicide bombers. Arafat and the PA are encouraging them to attack innocent Israeli citizens.


[quote]Not really. There is a very small minority of Palestinian nutters doing those attacks. Most of them are just ordinary people who see their country occupied by invading Israelis, who kill hundreds of Palestinians every year.
Just like it was a small amount of Germans that were supporting the Nazi's. Just like it was a small amount of German's that enabled the Nazi's to happen.


[quote]Actually, the way the world is going now, I fully expect a coalition of local Arab nations to join together, call themselves a "coalition against terror", and gather their forces to wipe Israel off the map. And I also expect Israel to launch nukes in retaliation. The USA's efforts right now, combined with Israel's constant killing of civilians, is polarising things to the extent that I find this very likely.
Ahh, they have tried this in the past only to get their butts kicked everytime. The Arabs are not capable of winning a war against Israel. Remeber the U.S. has airbases in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and has aircraft carriers in the region at all times. The Arabs would get massacred and would never think of crossing the U.S. militarily; especially with the current administration who love nothing more than to take over their oil fields also. Yes, an attack on Israel would be construed as an attack upon the United States.

I have had enough of this right now. Just too many points to address, but I am sure that you get the picture.


So you disapprove of the French resistance fighting the NAZIs? When you're the underdog, you fight for your freedom. You don't accept your crappy situation.


I find it very possible. And likely. Israel only survives right now through military activity.


Do you wear a tinfoil cap? Is the evil United Nations beaming thoughts into your head from the television static?


The EU gave Yasser thirty billion dollars or some huge amount, yes. Germany gives Israel money every year, which Israel uses to kill Palestinian civilians - that is terrorism. The USA gives Israel money and weapons, which it uses to kill Palestinian civilians - that is terrorism.


Palestine is gaining more and more friends every year.


They have the EU, Arab states all around, sea access, and more nations every year gaining sympathy for them. Why would they be cut off and alone?


You are a complete psycho. A raving nutter. I'm glad you're not my countryman. Your eagerness for death on a massive scale, combined with your complete lack of knowledge of what's going on in the world, make you a disturbing little monkey.


That's because you are an uneducated, emotionally-retarded buffoon.


You have lost any and all chance of ever being more than a sub-human monkey in my eyes. I hope you find yourself at the mercy of people who see you in exactly the same way.

By the way, please learn how to PROPERLY quote posts so that people can quote you.

Actually, it was the Jewish peoples land first. Jews have been there since Moses led the 13 tribes from Egypt; since the people of Abraham (Jewish people) settled Palestine. It was also controlled by England immediately before the creation of Israel in 1948.

Go read Adam's most recent post.

Israel has only been occuplying lands that it has needed to protect herself.

Oh yes, Israel also NEEDED to establish Jewish settlements in the occupied lands, often in places where there was already a Palestinian settlement. :rolleyes:

Remember, it was the Arabs who have always been the aggressor and Israel has always had to defend herself.

Really? Is that so? :p

If the Arab states would make peace with Israel and accept her right to exist then Israel not have the same need for protection.

Oh yes, it is all the Arabs' fault... :rolleyes: Blame everything on the Arabs... I wish I had that wonderful list of Israeli quotes with me. (ie, Sharon's "we control America" or about how the Jews would get all the Arab land from Morocco to Iraq)

Israel is not the one who has been sending suicide bombers to kill innocent children.

Palestinian terrorists don't kill just innocent children. What about all the innocent children Israel shoots "in defence" because the children are throwing oh-so-harmful rocks at the tanks? Yes, these soldiers must be scared to death that the rocks will kill them! :rolleyes:

Israel is not the one that puposely attacks civilian targets.

Really?

Israel is not the one that is actively funding gorups that are listed by the U.S. government as terrorist organizations.

Yes, we can always trust the US, especially when it comes to the Mideast... ;)

Israel is not the one that decided terror was a legitimate means of negotiations.

Arafat never said that. Arafat denounces terrorism. Sharon, however, actively supports the killing of the Palestinian "terrorists" (many of which are undoubtedly terrorists, but many others of which are small children, elderly people, and innocent men and women)

This was all done by the Palestinan people, the Palestinian Authority, and Arafat.

Arafat? No. The PA? Not officially, some of the lower-ranking officials support terror as a means of negotiations, but they are only low-ranking officials, ie the US does not support discrimination just because Trent Lott does.

Here you are correct, in that it is not Yasser Arafat behind those attacks. It is small groups of individuals, guerillas, not attached to any state. On the other side, however, the Israeli Defence Force is state owned and operated and is killing hundreds of civilians.

Wow, you actually admit it! And guess what... Sharon supports the IDF! And not HUNDREDS of civilians, over 1400 in the past two years. :eek: How high is the Israeli deathcount from the same period of time? Not as high.

Arafat and the Palestinian Authority (PA) are funding the suicide bombers. Arafat and the PA are encouraging them to attack innocent Israeli citizens.

Really? Arafat does not support terrorism, ideologically or monetarily.

Also, Sharon and his gov't are funding the IDF in their murders of innocent citizens (as well as other numerous atrocities, ie rape, etc)

Actually, the way the world is going now, I fully expect a coalition of local Arab nations to join together, call themselves a "coalition against terror", and gather their forces to wipe Israel off the map.

Yeah, when hell freezes over. This won't happen with today's opressive Arab leaderships (in most, but not all, Arab nations). Only something like this would happen if civilians were in power. Hopefully, though, the Palestinian voice of reason will convince the other Arabs not to drive Israelis out, but rather to allow refugees back and get rid of the minority gov't.

I have had enough of this right now. Just too many points to address, but I am sure that you get the picture.

Yes, the picture that you are 98% biased on the situation and have not considered both viewpoints.

You are misquoting me at the end, but that is partially my fault for not doing the quote thing right.

Look, it was Arafat who walked away from the bargaining table with Barak. He was offered 90%+ of what he wanted and decided to walk away instead of taking it and negotiating further. Arafat then went to his henchmen and started the intifada. Terrorism is all Arafat knows. He talks peace in English while in Arabic he encourages suicide bombers. Arafat is the problem; Arafat is the terrorist; Arafat is the reason for Sharon getting elected.

Why can't people understand that Israel goes after the Palestinians ONLY after suicide bombings. It is not Israel that starts every round of violence, but the Palestinians.

You are wrong. Arafat controls the Palestinian bombers. To believe that is minor staff is naive at best.

Why can't they just accept that their "Allah" and "God" are the same thing and live in peace and harmony? Of course, in today's society, peace and harmony is out of the question, but they should at least recognize that it isn't that much of a difference. It's like we're back in the Iron Age with two tribes fighting for land and/or because of religious beliefs. There has to be a peaceful solution somwhow...

The Ghost of Ace,

Look, it was Arafat who walked away from the bargaining table with Barak. He was offered 90%+ of what he wanted and decided to walk away instead of taking it and negotiating further.

I have an idea!! I'll occupy your house and then we'll have negotiations. Then, I will let you have 90% of your house back, and then we'll all be happy!!!!! :)


Tom

Israel is occupying the land that is historically Israel. Jews have been on that land since Moses led his people from Egypt. Israel is willing to share that land, however, the Palestinians are not. The Palestinians (Arafat and his people) will not rest until there is no Jew left in the Middle East. The Jews have been there for millenia and will be there forever despite what Arafat wants!

Arafat is the great evil here. Without Arafat there would have been no Sharon. Arafat forced the hand of the Israeli people by rejecting Barak's offer and starting the intifada.

As a practical matter, there is no way the Palestinians can force Israel out; there is no way that the Arab nations to force Israel out. Israel is protected by the United States (as it should be). An attack upon Israel would result in the most serious of consequences for the aggressor(s). Remember, Israel has nukes (thanks to England who supplied the technology and the U.S. for the plutonium).

The Ghost of Ace,

Israel is willing to share that land, however, the Palestinians are not.

Let me see...

In 1948, the UN decides:

50% of Palestine goes to the Jews

50% of Palestine is left to the Palestinians


55 years later (2003):

100% of Palestine belongs to the Jews

0% of Palestine is left for the Palestinians.


If that's sharing, I would hate to see how it would be if Israel didn't share. :)

By the way, Palestinians aren't allowed to vote in Israeli elections even though Israel considers the occupied territories a part of Israel.

Tell me Ghost, are you allowed to vote in the country where you're from???

Tom

[QUOTE][i

Let me see...

In 1948, the UN decides:

50% of Palestine goes to the Jews

50% of Palestine is left to the Palestinians


55 years later (2003):

100% of Palestine belongs to the Jews

0% of Palestine is left for the Palestinians.

Let me remaind you if it was the other way around all jews in Israel were killed or deported. Let me also remaind you that in 48 the arabs invaded Israel and in 67 King Hussian from Jordan launched an attack on Israel and as a result Israel had invaded and occupied the West Bank that was part of Jordan then (no arab leader had any intetions at the time to give anything to the Palestinines mind you sharing)

QUOTE][By the way, Palestinians aren't allowed to vote in Israeli elections even though Israel considers the occupied territories a part of Israel.

The Israeli arabs have a full right to vote and have a number of representatives in the Israeli Parlament. The Palestiniens in the west bank are voting for the PA, those under Israel control can not vote as they are not Israeli citizens. Israel had never annexd the occupied terrtirories to Israel proper . It always argued it has a claim to it , but the final settlement of the territories should be and will decided among the parties involved in this endless conflict.
Full justice will be achived only when the issues of refugees, holy sites water and land will be dealt within the bounderies of current realities. Israel will have to give away settelments and land back , the palestinien will have to give up their dream of the right to return to Israel proper. Two states will live side by side not happily ever after but will continue with their daily life. The middle east is not a peacfull place with no regard to Israeli Arab conflict.

ethan,

Israel had never annexd the occupied terrtirories to Israel proper . It always argued it has a claim to it , but the final settlement of the territories should be and will decided among the parties involved in this endless conflict.

Every single official Israeli map shows the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as being part of Israel. If you don't believe me, here's a map of Israel from the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs official government website:

http://www.mfa.gov.il/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0dtq0

If all of the official maps of Israel show the West Bank and the Gaza Strip in Israel, wouldn't that make Palestinians Israelis?? You say that the Palestinians vote for the PLO. I vote for my state government, but that doesn't exclude me from voting for the federal government.

The cold hard fact is that Israel claims that the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are part of Israel, but it doesn't want to give the people living in those areas the rights of Israeli citizens. Israel would sooner give citizenship to a Jew living in New York, who never stepped foot in Israel, than a Palestinian born and living in the so-called "Israeli" territories of Gaza and the West Bank. Maybe it has something to do with the Palestinian's religion...........

Tom

Do you wear a tinfoil cap? Is the evil United Nations beaming thoughts into your head from the television static?

That was funny.

But increasingly I'm finding myself feeling as if the world would be better off if someone went in and shot every damned one of them and piled the lot in an unmarked grave.

I bet during WW2 some Nazi officer somewhere must have had the same thoughts about Jews.

Originally posted by Prosoothus
ethan,



Every single official Israeli map shows the Gaza Strip and the West Bank as being part of Israel. If you don't believe me, here's a map of Israel from the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs official government website:

Tom,
It does not matter how Israel paints its maps, (which by the way palestinians maps earse Israel and tel Aviv and other) you can see in this map, area A B and C each one of them with a diffrent status, all thiswas in process in which Israel gave more and more land to Araft and his gang in a gradual process so he can built his state in the west bank and gaza. Anyway my main point: the west bank and gaza are officialy (ecxept the parts that were given to the PA) under international law regarded as ocuupied military zone. The ruler in these places is a military governer appointed by the Israeli army. The palestinies are officaly under occupation and do not enjoy the citizen rights that the other 1 million arab muslims israelis or as they call themselves Israeli Palestiniens (20% of the Israeli population!) enjoy. That is why many Israelis see this situation as unjust but there is a terrible catch 22 here and that is why the two sides are in this dead lock for the last 35 years (since 1967)
By the way Israel is not being permitted to annex the territories even if it wishes to do so the international community and the US will not allow it. more so the majority of Israelis would like to pull out and build a wall and completly separte from this place (west bank and gaza)


The cold hard fact is that Israel claims that the West Bank and the Gaza Strip are part of Israel, but it doesn't want to give the people living in those areas the rights of Israeli citizens. Israel would sooner give citizenship to a Jew living in New York, who never stepped foot in Israel, than a Palestinian born and living in the so-called "Israeli" territories of Gaza and the West Bank. Maybe it has something to do with the Palestinian's religion....

As I wrote before, the only cold fact is that these territories are not under Israeli law even if Israel holds them, for now. You can't hold the stick on both sides, if the Palestinins would like to have a state there then they should, but then they will have to vote (assuming they will be democratic..) to the their state. If not, then Israel should annex for good this area and the world should leave Israel alone.
Israel is primary a land for jews, and yes, it rather have jews coming in. During ww2 jews tried to escape the nazis and every door was closed including UK , US , and even British (then) Palestine that was ruled by the British who surrended to arab pressures not to let in any jews in. We know what was the result.. since then, Israel had recived jews who fled Russia Ethuopia, and other places but most of all 2 milloin jews from arab countries who were deported after all their belongings were confescated! these jews in Israel are the people who support Sharon togther with Russians jews (did you read some news about chechnia lately? see how the Russians deal with their Muslims citizens) they remember how terrible they were treated by their fellow arabs!
The sad part is that this is not a conflict over some real estste, the divison between the Palestinains and Israelis crosess religion, culture , language, and everything else you can think of. 9/11 was a wake call for the world, for Israel it is the daily reality the for the last 100 years almost.

If you are looking for example as how the west treats and discrimniates other religions look at the case of Turkey and its desparate attempts to join the EU. ( and by the way Israel has wonderfull relationship with Turkey)


.......

Tom

1) It was the Palestinians' land first.
And: Austrailia was the Aborigines' land first, no?

So, why don't you, Adam, move out of Australia?

And you presume to tell the World the Israeli's should vacate their premises because they're not welcome, even though you won't?

Right. :rolleyes:

there is a HUGE difference

palistinians are not alowed to VOTE, they cant control there own fate

now arguments could be made that things are bad for aborigionals and toristraight islanders but at least they can vote and they are alowed jobs and there are laws against discriminating against them for jobs ect

they are PART of australia, palistinians are NOT a part of israil

palistinians are not alowed to VOTE,....
Umm, They voted for Arafat.

As for controlling their own fate: they are in total control of their fate, and they truly suck at it.

....but at least they can vote....
But, even by "voting", "they" cannot throw off the hobbling shackles of the Tyranny of the Majority.

And the Majority isn't interested in their plight.

Yet the Majority bitches at the Israelis' analogous treatment of the Palestinians. :rolleyes:

Oh, yeah.

no the ones who live in "israil" are they alowed to vote for those controling the land they are living on, ummmm no?

did you notice that the palistininans live in "refugee camps", that comes from american articals as well so dont say its propergander because the propergander comes the other way

aborigonals dont live in refugee camps

they live in there OWN homes

....aborigonals dont live in refugee camps....they live in there OWN homes
But not anywhere they like, because most everywhere has been usurped by foreigners.

they can buy a house wherever they like, they get extra money from the goverment to do it

can a paslistinan?

basically the issue is that what happened in the past is just that in the past

whats happerning in palistine is happerning NOW

....basically the issue is that what happened in the past is just that in the past....
And: what do the Aboriginies think about your perspective?

Not as you do, certainly.

the aborigionals arnt being SHOOT for throwing as stone at a TANK

The Aborigines obviously are far smarter.

Damnit. That was funny.

Originally posted by Mr. G
And: Austrailia was the Aborigines' land first, no?

So, why don't you, Adam, move out of Australia?

And you presume to tell the World the Israeli's should vacate their premises because they're not welcome, even though you won't?


I'm not running around killing hundreds of aborigine civilians. Idiot.

Originally posted by Adam
I'm not running around killing hundreds of aborigine civilians. Idiot. That's because they're not running around blowing themselves up in train stations.

[insert ad-hominem attack here]

Originally posted by Mr. G
But not anywhere they like, because most everywhere has been usurped by foreigners.

By golly, with every post you demonstate ignorance. Congratulations.

99% of Australia is empty. 99% of Australians occupy 1% of the land, or thereabouts. If anyone does not want to be part of this society, they can quite easily leave it and return to the existence their ancestors had here prior to the arrival of Eurpoean settlers.

Originally posted by Kyle_S
That's because they're not running around blowing themselves up in train stations.


You're exactly right. We live in peace here.

Did you ever stop to think that Isael would not have to resort to tanks if the Palestinians would stop using violence as a negotiating tool.

Whomever said that this is more about land is absolutely correct. Most Arab states could care less about the Palestinians; what they are concerned about and what gives the Palestinians their drive is the control of the holy sites. That is where the negotiations broke down and when Arafat walked out.

Israel was not about to let the Palestinians control East Jerusalem, where all of the holy sites are located. That is becasue there are Jewish holy sites there as well, like the Wailing Wall. Israel wants to keep equal access to all of the sites and, indeed, is doing that. The Palestinians would close it off to all no muslims and giving the opportunity destroy all of the Jewish holy places.

I am not sure what the answer to the whole problem is other than both sides must realize that they are going to give up on some of their demands to achieve peace. Maybe, Tom Clancy had it right. Just have the UN administer the Holy Lands to ensure that all are given appropriate access.

While I am new to this board, I would request that everyone refrain from name calling. It serves no purpose other than to infuriate others and diminshes the position of the person making the insult. It is not productive or condusive to a meaningful conversation.

Adam

you live in peace there because you killed almost all of the native people and forced the rest of them to live by your culture and standards

Originally posted by ethan
Adam

you live in peace there because you killed almost all of the native people and forced the rest of them to live by your culture and standards

Again: What Europeans did upon arriving here was no different to what variour groups here were doing to each other prior to the arrival of Europeans.

Do I approve of those Europeans doing that, or of the various aborigine tribes also doing it? Not at all. Nor do I approve of the way Roman/Christian culture was forced on the lands of my own ancestors. I don't approve of any group doing it.

The day the remnants of Roman society move out of the lands of my own ancestors (and yes, much of the "Western" ways many complain about are in fact the remnants of Rome) and I am given a huge parcel of land in Europe, I will move over there and leave this place to those whose ancestors were earlier settlers.

Again: If my ancestors have lived in this town five generations, and your ancestors have lived in this town four generations, do I have more claim to this place than you do?

And finally: Israel is doing this right now. We can't change the past. But this is happening right now, in front of us all, and the only reason the UN is not stopping it is because the USA so strongly supports this behaviour.

Originally posted by The Ghost of Ace Remember, it was the Arabs who have always been the aggressor and Israel has always had to defend herself. Sorry, I know it's a little late to respond to this one, but I just can't pass it up. Have you ever heard of the six day war?

Originally posted by The Ghost of Ace Remember:
it was the Arabs who have always been the aggressor and Israel has always had to defend herself.

Read some history. The land is Palestinian, taken by the Israelis by military force. Also look in your encyclopedia for a country called "Lebanon". L-E-B-A-N-O-N.

Originally posted by Nasor
Sorry, I know it's a little late to respond to this one, but I just can't pass it up. Have you ever heard of the six day war?
That was a pre-emptive stirke against a military force that was going ot attack Israel imminently. There is no doubt that the Arab forces were massing for an attack. It was, in essence, an act of self-defense. What would you have Israel do, wait for a certain attack to come before defending herself.

As for history, I suggest you look closer. Jews have always, always been on that land.

Regarding Lebabnon, hello, we are talking about a place were terrorists were launching attacks at Israel. What is Israel supposed to do? Let these terrorists keep lauching attack after attack and do nothing about. No, they do what every other state would do they go and stop the attacks.

Technically the hebrews have only been on that land for I would guess ~3000 years. Still that is a lot longer than muslim groups. Islam after all is a sidebranch of judaism and is actually newer than even christianity I believe.

Originally posted by Nasor
Sorry, I know it's a little late to respond to this one, but I just can't pass it up. Have you ever heard of the six day war? The arab nations were building up against Israel. Had Israel not engaged in a spoiling attack, it would not be here today.

When the evidence is obvious that your enemies are planning something against you, the best thing you can do is hit them before they hit you.

Adam

before we continue, I need to understand where you stand, do you support a two state solution side by side or do you call for eliminating the state of Israel, sending 6 million (does this number ring any bell?) to where?

And finally: Israel is doing this right now. We can't change the past. But this is happening right now, in front of us all, and the only reason the UN is not stopping it is because the USA so strongly supports this behaviour

Adam,

What is Israel doing right now? who exactly broke the negotiation in camp david and initiated a brutal terror campagin?

I am happy to have the USA on our side versus the rest of the 200 hypocrite third world regims that make the majority of the UN I guess that's the pay off for siding with the winner in the cold, war, the arabs and the palestainines should learn to pick the right side , Israel can also do what it does becaue it is better organize , developed, motivited and can take on any coalition of arab states and crush them.

what gives the Palestinians their drive is the control of the holy sites.

Ghost,

What about settlers occupying Palestinian land? Is that related to the holy sites as well?

Originally posted by The Ghost of Ace

As for history, I suggest you look closer. Jews have always, always been on that land.

No.


Israelites, a Semitic people, apparently of nomadic origin, whose emergence in the Levant is identified with a shift of settlement at the start if the Iron Age (c. 1200 bc), when a new pattern of small villages dispersed in upland regions replaced the urban life of the Bronze Age. Explanations for this process range from the nomadic invasion thesis (derived from Biblical accounts in Exodus) to settlement of indigenous populations of nomads and brigands, to social revolution by the urban lower classes at the end of the Bronze Age. The Israelites' conquest of areas occupied by the Canaanites brought them into an ultimately successful conflict with the Philistines. The major building works carried out under the united kingdom belong to the reign of Solomon. The northern kingdom of Israel (see Samaria) was conquered by the Assyrians in the late 8th century BC, while the southern kingdom of Judah was reduced by the Babylonians in the early 6th century BC. See also Jerusalem.

Jerusalem, a city in the Judaean hills, Israel, which has been occupied for thousands of years and which has been excavated virtually continuously since the 1860s. Comparatively little remains of ancient Jerusalem, chiefly because of the repeated destructions suffered by the city (e.g. that of Titus in 70 AD) and later Byzantine and Islamic overbuilding. The first major construction at Jerusalem seems to have been the stone fortifications of the late Bronze Age. Jerusalem was captured by the Israelites under Davin in c.996 BC and extended to the north by Solomon, who built a temple and palace in an area later overbuilt by the Herodian temple platform, and by Hezekiah, whose water tunnel is still visible. Jerusalem was patronised by the Byzantine emperors beause of its Christian associations and by Islamic caliphs as a holy city. Most of the walls to be seen at Jerusalem are the work of Suleiman the Magnificent (1538-41 AD) on top of Herodian and Roman foundations, while the octagonal 'Dome of the Rock' (685-692 AD) is the most striking of the Islamic buildings in Jerusalem.

Canaanites, an ethnic group identified with the sophisticated urban civilisation of the Levant during the Bronze Age (see Hazor, Jericho, Lachish, Beit Mersim). The Canaanites were dislodged from much of their territory by the Israelites and Philistines, but much of their culture persisted among the Phoenicians.

Phoenicians, a Semitic people, the cultural heirs of the Canaanites, who flourished as traders from their ports of Byblos, Sidon, and Tyre during the 1st millennium BC. They are credited with the founding of Carthage and the invention of the alphabet.

Philistines, one of the Sea Peoples whose occupation of southern Palestine marks the beginning of the Iron Age in that region. The five chief cities of the Philistines (the 'Pentapolis') were Ashkelon, Ashdod, Gaza, Gath, and Ekron.

What does it matter? I don't care who was there first, that's what children bitch about. We're long past that point, and my interest is in ending the violence. Then we can whine and push each other in the sand about how we want this or that plot of artillery pocked land.

Originally posted by ethan
Adam

before we continue, I need to understand where you stand, do you support a two state solution side by side or do you call for eliminating the state of Israel, sending 6 million (does this number ring any bell?) to where?

All Israelis should pull back into the smaller area initially outlined by the UN resolution which gave them some land there in the first place. They should entirely vacate the rest of Palestine and Lebanon.

As for numbers, does 1,400 ring a bell? Last I heard, that was how many Arab civilians the IDF had murdered in the past two years.

Originally posted by ethan

What is Israel doing right now? who exactly broke the negotiation in camp david and initiated a brutal terror campagin?

Who is it that occupies Palestine and southern Lebanon by military force?

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=15179

Originally posted by ethan

I am happy to have the USA on our side versus the rest of the 200 hypocrite third world regims that make the majority of the UN I guess that's the pay off for siding with the winner in the cold, war, the arabs and the palestainines should learn to pick the right side , Israel can also do what it does becaue it is better organize , developed, motivited and can take on any coalition of arab states and crush them.
So you're saying might = right? Nice.

Originally posted by Adam
Who is it that occupies Palestine and southern Lebanon by military force?Who is it that has tried to use military force to draw concessions from Israel, continually for the last half century?
So you're saying might = right? Nice. In the grand scheme of things, this is a truth.

Who is it that occupies Palestine and southern Lebanon by military force?

Adam wake up! Israel had left Lebanon for the last two years and returned to the international border as was approved by the UN!! Since then, Israeli border patrols are constantly attacked by the Hessbula terror group iwth their mission to destroy Israel. They are backed up by the democratic and human rights major lovers such as Syria and Iran. Most likely it was a mistake to go out of there, and most likely will have to in there again.

"Might is right" - my family in the holocaust were very very right! look how they ended, as soap!

Israel had left Lebanon for the last two years and returned to the international border as was approved by the UN!!

True, they did, but Israel still conducts air raids and such over the border.


"Might is right" - my family in the holocaust were very very right! look how they ended, as soap!

In case you didn't understand (seems likely), I was pointing out that the idiot believes might=right.

I see a tiny spark of light in this tunnel and that is that Mr Teflon Sharon is probably going to lose some votes in the election due to corruption scandals (the least of his crimes) and hopefully Arafat will die soon from being old, so maybe that two new leaders could make a fresh start.

Kyle is right about one thing: if you push the israeli people, like the palestine extremists do, they just push back, hence that's why Sharon was looking forward to have 40 votes instead of 21, despite the bad economic circumstances (wich he claims are not his fault cause the whole world is in economic crisis) and not being able to end the attacks (Sharon claimed that the attacks are the legacy of previous government the "soft" Labourparty policy). So despite all this violence Sharon was allmost getting away with it, cause the people on the streets were more disgusted with the bomb attacks, than Sharons failing policy, but due to the scandals (which I believe is just the tip of the iceberg) everyone can see sharon for what he really is: Don Corleone.

I understand that some israelis do not want to show weakness to the palestinians and rather followed Sharon , but hopefully they understand as well he will lead everybody to the gates of hell.

In case you didn't understand (seems likely), I was pointing out that the idiot believes might=right.

Adam, it doesn't take a PhD to understand your comments.
I think you are the one who did not understand, I was poniting out that being right does not help you survive in this world, might does, and the migths become right again after they rewrite history in that sense might = right. And it is not only the idiots but it is the majrity of people who run this world.


True, they did, but Israel still conducts air raids and such over the border

either you

the Lebanese army would not deploy on the Israeli border so the Hizbulla is there targeting and harassing Israel. Whenever Israel reacts they scream for help , scream for people like you in the west that either just naive or full of hate to Israel, we are not to be blame they say, it is Hizzbala not Lebanon. Not to mention that Syrian army occupies almost half the country. (does it bothers you my dear Adam? did it bothered you when the Syrian killed 5000 people in Hamat? did it bothered you when the Plastinins massacred hunderds of christians in Tel Zata'ar? or your moral standards only applies to Israel?) Think Adam please think, why doesn't Israel fly over Jordan or Syria, what interst does Israe have to spend energy and resources over Lebanon? why open war on two fronts?

Adam I am realy curious to know your solution for the Israeli arab conflict. Do you support a two state solution or are you simply looking for the total destruction of Israel?

Ethan... might I recommend surgery to have that chip removed from your shoulder? ;)

Just because an individual disagrees with your point of view does not necessarily mean that they desire your destruction. In a rational and peaceful discussion, your question to Adam need merely to have been, "...I am realy curious to know your solution for the Israeli arab conflict. Do you support a two state solution?"

Adding "...or are you simply looking for the total destruction of Israel?" is merely inflammatory. It is the literary equivalent of puffing up your chest, sticking your chin out and daring someone to hit you. And it is, IMHO, the biggest hindrance to a peaceful resolution because BOTH sides continue this type of posturing.

Who will stop doing this first, do you suppose?

:m: Peace.

goofyfish hello

As always I appriciate your role as facilitator and and guardian of standards here. I also agree with your observation. To my defence I will say that some people here imply, or say in a loud and clear voice that the state of Israel should not exist.( don't make me look for quots, it's very late here..) It is important to me to understand where this person stands in the debate. Am I to emotional? yes, it is my life and my family's life that you are all disscusing here. ( yes I know, the drama.. )

This is where I stand in the debate:

- two sovereign states that FULLY (and i mean from the heart not with the mouth when american or Saoudi Arabia cash is needed) respect eachothers borders and citizens
- For Israel, the Golan Height seems a life insurance from strategic/defense viewpoint. Let's make a deal with the USA and Syria that they can have middle Iraq (let sunnites be ruled by other sunnites) if Israel gets to keep the Golan Height and Syria Stops making noise in Lebanon and kick out Hezbollah.
- I am not very fond of religions, in fact I see them as one of the major obstacles for serious respectable peace. for instance the matter of Jeruzalem. This is where both islamic and judaic religions have strong roots and both want to rule this particular city and this particular case will provide fuel for fire until the end of days. Hopefully a bright non-religious israeli leader will stand up and say "Look, Jeruzalem is just one of the towns and cities that need to be considered when we make a final deal about dividing the territories, if it's so important to them, why not give it to them showing our goodwill?? so that they have their capitol , we have tel aviv. Everybody happy except some orthodox-religious-jews and some wouldbe Prophet Mohammed successor that would like to drive every jew in the sea, but who needs them religious nutters anyway? they brainwash people to become suicide bombers or built settlements but refuse to fight in the israeli army, expecting the army to defend their conquest for gaining holy land"

Why not? The current state of affairs is that israeli and palestine parents burry their children on a weekly basis now. I don't expect this to change until the leaders change.

Alternatively, still a few, but influential right-wing and/or religious israelis believe in the Jordan is Palestine model and try to drive the palesinians out inch by inch through settlements and buying up their houses / farms etc... but even that will take another 150 years before this silent ethnic cleansing is completed. And you can bet that the intifada will continue until the very end, when palestinians are gone and israel is kosher and the promised safe harbour for the jews, but the children of the palestines in jordan and the islamic arab brothers will not forget, so israelis must watch their back when they go outside the safe harbour, on holidays to Kenia for example. Even if the Jordan=Palestine model is feasible , it would only increase hate and what do you mean safe harbour? Ok, so no longer misguided palestinian youngsters to blow themselves straight to paradise, but who is gonna catch that innocent looking tradingship in the future, that pretends to pick up cargo in the harbour of tel-aviv while really it has a crude terrorist atomic bomb on board???

Do we want to risk paying such a prize, do we want our children to sacfrifice themselves because our God is better than their God?

I know that rabbis and mullahs are often very intellectual and educated people, they would probably score much higher in IQ tests than me,but unfortunately that never stopped them from becoming crackpots and looking to the divine sky they do not see the most simple and basic down to earth humanitarian things that i do see.

Adam, it doesn't take a PhD to understand your comments.

I do try to keep it simple for the lackwits.


I think you are the one who did not understand, I was poniting out that being right does not help you survive in this world, might does, and the migths become right again after they rewrite history in that sense might = right. And it is not only the idiots but it is the majrity of people who run this world.

I agree, and it's a shame. I am trying to get the pro-war nutters to actually think about their slogan-driven war-lust.


the Lebanese army would not deploy on the Israeli border so the Hizbulla is there targeting and harassing Israel. Whenever Israel reacts they scream for help , scream for people like you in the west that either just naive or full of hate to Israel, we are not to be blame they say, it is Hizzbala not Lebanon. Not to mention that Syrian army occupies almost half the country. (does it bothers you my dear Adam? did it bothered you when the Syrian killed 5000 people in Hamat? did it bothered you when the Plastinins massacred hunderds of christians in Tel Zata'ar? or your moral standards only applies to Israel?)

1) Get the chip off your shoulders.

2) Don't call me "dear".

3) Read my posts more if you wish to see how my moral standards are applied.


Think Adam please think, why doesn't Israel fly over Jordan or Syria, what interst does Israe have to spend energy and resources over Lebanon? why open war on two fronts?

Israel's constant war-making and military-driven expansion since the UN gave away Palestinian land continually annoys the hell out of the locals. Those locals respond by trying to take back the land. Israel responds to that by further expansion through military force.


Adam I am realy curious to know your solution for the Israeli arab conflict. Do you support a two state solution or are you simply looking for the total destruction of Israel?

I have already answered this.

) Get the chip off your shoulders.

That's a good solid argument


Don't call me "dear".
agree , but then stop implying that I am an idiot or lackwits and let's keep this respectfull!!
[
QUOTE]Read my posts more if you wish to see how my moral standards are applied[/QUOTE]

that's is just an easy way out!

Israel's constant war-making and military-driven expansion since the UN gave away Palestinian land continually annoys the hell out of the locals. Those locals respond by trying to take back the land. Israel responds to that by further expansion through military force.

What kind of argument is that? 1984 sort of war is peace etc?
1. The UN "gave away land" or rather decided on partition the land to two states in 1948, the Israelis accepted the arabs refused. Fact!!
2. I am realy sorry thet they are annoyed, they were also annoyed during the 70's and killed each other for 10 years. In that case Israel is 100% justified to do what it does, which is to defend itself and I rest my case.

I have already answered this.
I went over this posting again and didn't find it, sorry (truly) please refer me to the right place [B]

That's a good solid argument

I was not making an argument, just an observation.


but then stop implying that I am an idiot or lackwits and let's keep this respectfull!!

No, you're nto special. There are many lackwits, none of whom are worthy of a rectal worm's respect.


Read my posts more if you wish to see how my moral standards are applied
that's is just an easy way out!

I have no intention of repeating what I have already said man times elsewhere. Try reading.


1. The UN "gave away land" or rather decided on partition the land to two states in 1948, the Israelis accepted the arabs refused. Fact!!

Indeed. The UN took Palestinaian land, without Palestinian approval, and gave it to the Israelites. They were not wanted there. And from that small parcel of stolen land, the Israelies spread over time through military force.


2. I am realy sorry thet they are annoyed, they were also annoyed during the 70's and killed each other for 10 years. In that case Israel is 100% justified to do what it does, which is to defend itself and I rest my case.

It is self-defence to shoot missiles from IDF helicopters and kill Palestinian children? Okay. Now we know your perspective.


I went over this posting again and didn't find it, sorry (truly) please refer me to the right place
Again: All Israelis should pull back into the smaller area initially outlined by the UN resolution which gave them some land there in the first place. They should entirely vacate the rest of Palestine and Lebanon.

Map of old Israel, with outline of current Israel. (http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/kingdoms.html)

History of Israel Timeline (http://www.minndakjcrc.org/educatorsResearchIsrael.htm) :

2000-1700 Before Common Era (BCE) (approx)
The Patriarchs: Abraham, Isaac & Jacob & the Matriarch, Sara, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah – live in Canaan, the Promised Land, the land promised by G-d to Abraham, the first Jew.

1700-1300 BCE (approx)
Israelites Slaves in Egypt.

1250 BCE (approx)
Exodus from Egypt; Conquest of Canaan (Moses & Joshua).
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Judaism/tribemap.html

1025-928 BCE
Rule of the Great Monarchs (Saul, David, Solomon).
http://www.britannica.com/eb/art?id=7238&type=A

1000 BCE
Solomon Builds Temple in Jerusalem.

928-726 BCE
Divided Kingdoms (Israel & Judah).
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/kingdoms.html

726 BCE
Northern Kingdom (Israel) Falls.

586 BCE
The Destruction of the First Temple, Judah Falls.

586-538 BCE
Babylonian Exile; Ends wirh Cyrus' Edict.

515 BCE
Second Temple Completed Under Persians.

332 BCE
Alexander the Great Conquers Israel.

167 BCE
Hasmonean Uprising.
http://www.britannica.com/eb/art?id=7239&type=A

80 BCE
Roman Victory over Maccabees.

37-4 BCE
Herod the Great.
http://www.britannica.com/eb/art?id=7240&type=A

0 Common Era (CE)
Birth of Jesus, a devout Jew from Nazereth.

33 CE
Crucifixion of Jesus.

66-72 CE
The Great Revolt.

70 CE
The Destruction of the 2nd Temple.

135
Bar Kokhba Revolt.

200
Mishnah Compiled.

425 (approx)
Palestinian Talmud Completed.

550 (approx)
Babylonian Talmud Completed.

570
Birth of Muhammed, prophet of Islam

632
Death of Muhammed.

638
Muslim Conquest of Palestine.

1096
Crusaders Massacre Jews in Rhineland.

1240
Paris Disputation & Burning of Talmud.

1290
Jews Expelled from England.

1391-1492
Inquisition; Expulsion of the Jews from Spain.

1516
First Ghetto in Venice.

1567
Rabbi Joseph Caro's Shulkhan `Arukh.

1730
First Synagogue in New York.

1791
Jews Granted French Citizenship.

1820s
Reform Judaism begins in Germany.

1881-1924
2.5 million Jews flee persecution in Eastern European.
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/pale.html

Many migrate to the United States, fewer migrate to Palestine, which is then ruled by the Ottoman Turkish Empire.
http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/yishuv.html

1886
Conservative Judaism created.

1897
First Zionist Congress.

1917
British and French forces occupy Greater Palestine. British Government issues Balfour Declaration, promising a Jewish state in Palestine.
http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0dt00

1922
League of Nations (precursor to the United Nations) and the U.S. Congress, respectively, endorse Balfour declaration promising a Jewish state in Palestine. In 1923, Britain alters the size of the promised Jewish homeland.
http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0dt10

1939
Britain issues White Paper reneging on its promise, as expressed in the Balfour declaration, for a Jewish state in Palestine. It was also Great Britain's change in policy toward Palestine, especially in the White Paper, that disallowed millions of European Jews unable to escape from Nazi-occupied Europe to Palestine.

1933-1945
The Holocaust; Arab states and leaders join with Nazi Germany.

1947
UN approves plan to partition Palestine; Jews accept partition, Arabs reject partition and prepare to oppose partition plan by force.
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/part.html

1948
Creation of the State of Israel. United States is the first country to recognize the newly reestablished Jewish state. Immediately, five Arab armies invade fledgling state.
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/invade.html

Ensuing war produced about 500,000 Arab refugees, most of whom fled their homes at the urging of Arab leaders.
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/refuge.html

Nearly 750,000 Jews living in Arab countries are persecuted and nearly all are forced to flee to Israel, where they are accepted.
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/refs.html

With virtually no protest from Palestinian Arabs or international observers, Arab countries occupy lands reserved for a Palestinian state.

1956
Sinai War; In violation of international law, Egypt closes shipping lanes to Israeli shipping. Israel defends reopens shipping lanes by force and temporarily occupies the Sinai Peninsula after a 100 hour war.
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/sinai.html

1964
Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) founded by Yasser Arafat and others. PLO emerges as a central terrorist organization tied to anti-West, pro-Soviet movements. Before long, dozens of Arab terrorist groups are formed, most bent on killing Israelis and Americans.
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/fed.html

June 1967
Six Day War; Egypt and Syrian mass forces on their borders with Israel (see map for Israel’s vulnerable borders)
http://www.israel.org/mfa/go.asp?MFAH0dt40

Israel launches a preemptive attack and captures the Gaza Strip, the Sinai Peninsula and the Golan Heights. Jordan ignores Israel’s warning not to participate and begins shelling Israel. Israel captures the West Bank and unifies Jerusalem. Following the cessation of hostilities, Israel offers to negotiate peace. Arab states refuse and issue the infamous Khartoum declaration: no peace with Israel; no recognition of Israel and no negotiations with Israel.
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/six.html

September 1967
United Nations passes U.N. resolution 242.

1969-72
War of Attrition; Nearly constant state of war on Israel’s northern and southern borders as neighboring Arab states engage in terrorism, artillery shelling and air attacks against Israel.

1972
11 Israeli Olympic athletes murdered by Palestinian terrorists at the Munich Olympic games.

1973
Yom Kippur War; Syria and Egypt launch surprise attack against Israel. While initially stunned, Israel wins a costly strategic victory, coming within 30 kilometers of Damascus, Syria, and crossing the Suez Canal into Egypt.
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/egypt.html
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/syria.html

1977
Egyptian President Anwar Sadat makes breakthrough visit to Israel.

1979
Camp David Accords signed, bringing bring peace between Israel and Egypt.

1982
Lebanon War; following years of incessant terrorist attacks originating in Lebanese territory, Israel launches a defensive strike to remove the terrorist Palestine Liberation Organization from Lebanon.

1993
Oslo Peace Accords with Palestinians
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/oslo.html

1994
Israeli-Jordanian Peace Agreement
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/jordan.html

1995
In September 1995 the PLO and Israel sign a second peace accord, expanding limited Palestinian self-rule to almost all Palestinian towns and refugee camps in the West Bank.

Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin assassinated

May 2000
Israel unilaterally withdraws troops from the security zone in Lebanon.

Link:
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/MAPS/IMAGES/lebseczonemap.jpg

July/August 2000
Palestine Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat rejects unprecedented offer from Israel, in which Israel offered 94% of the occupied territories, part of East Jerusalem and the return of the reunification of tens of thousands of Palestinian family members. At this time, 98% of Palestinians in the disputed territories live under Palestinian rule.

September 2000
Palestinians respond to Israel’s peace offering with violence. Supported by Palestinian security forces and encouraged by Palestinians leaders, terrorists and Palestinians militia groups attack Israeli outposts and citizens. Palestinians authorities release convicted terrorists, who immediately engage in car bomb and suicide bombings against Israel.

January/February 2001
Israel offers further concession that would create a Palestinian state on nearly 100% of the Occupied Territories (including a land swap with Israel), give Palestinians control of most of East Jerusalem and provide the framework for a deal on Palestinian refugees. Palestinian leaders reject the offer and continue the violence against Israel.

February 2001
Israel elects Ariel Sharon as prime minister. Sharon assembles a national unity government with Shimon Peres, a leader of the main opposition party and an architect of the Oslo Accords, as foreign minister.

"Indeed. The UN took Palestinaian land, without Palestinian approval, and gave it to the Israelites. They were not wanted there. And from that small parcel of stolen land, the Israelies spread over time through military force."

Er... The land had been promised to the Jews back when it was British land.
Er...if by "through military force" you mean "multiple arab nations attempted to wipe them out and in the wars because of this they captured land, and then offered it back in exchange for peace (but were, of course, refused)" -- then yes, yes you are right.

I've given you history on Palestine and the Israelites many times. Here it is again:

Israelites, a Semitic people, apparently of nomadic origin, whose emergence in the Levant is identified with a shift of settlement at the start if the Iron Age (c. 1200 bc), when a new pattern of small villages dispersed in upland regions replaced the urban life of the Bronze Age. Explanations for this process range from the nomadic invasion thesis (derived from Biblical accounts in Exodus) to settlement of indigenous populations of nomads and brigands, to social revolution by the urban lower classes at the end of the Bronze Age. The Israelites' conquest of areas occupied by the Canaanites brought them into an ultimately successful conflict with the Philistines. The major building works carried out under the united kingdom belong to the reign of Solomon. The northern kingdom of Israel (see Samaria) was conquered by the Assyrians in the late 8th century BC, while the southern kingdom of Judah was reduced by the Babylonians in the early 6th century BC. See also Jerusalem.

Jerusalem, a city in the Judaean hills, Israel, which has been occupied for thousands of years and which has been excavated virtually continuously since the 1860s. Comparatively little remains of ancient Jerusalem, chiefly because of the repeated destructions suffered by the city (e.g. that of Titus in 70 AD) and later Byzantine and Islamic overbuilding. The first major construction at Jerusalem seems to have been the stone fortifications of the late Bronze Age. Jerusalem was captured by the Israelites under Davin in c.996 BC and extended to the north by Solomon, who built a temple and palace in an area later overbuilt by the Herodian temple platform, and by Hezekiah, whose water tunnel is still visible. Jerusalem was patronised by the Byzantine emperors beause of its Christian associations and by Islamic caliphs as a holy city. Most of the walls to be seen at Jerusalem are the work of Suleiman the Magnificent (1538-41 AD) on top of Herodian and Roman foundations, while the octagonal 'Dome of the Rock' (685-692 AD) is the most striking of the Islamic buildings in Jerusalem.

Canaanites, an ethnic group identified with the sophisticated urban civilisation of the Levant during the Bronze Age (see Hazor, Jericho, Lachish, Beit Mersim). The Canaanites were dislodged from much of their territory by the Israelites and Philistines, but much of their culture persisted among the Phoenicians.

Phoenicians, a Semitic people, the cultural heirs of the Canaanites, who flourished as traders from their ports of Byblos, Sidon, and Tyre during the 1st millennium BC. They are credited with the founding of Carthage and the invention of the alphabet.

Philistines, one of the Sea Peoples whose occupation of southern Palestine marks the beginning of the Iron Age in that region. The five chief cities of the Philistines (the 'Pentapolis') were Ashkelon, Ashdod, Gaza, Gath, and Ekron.

I would like to offer my comments.

It's not about "driving the Israelis into the sea" anymore. It's no longer about committing genocide on the Jewish people. As one Palestinian fighter said, they could kill a lot more Israelis than they do if that was the goal. They are sending the message that they will never give up the struggle for independence. The weak autonomy the Israelis have offered is unacceptable to them, just as it was unacceptable to us prior to 1776.

While there may not have actually been a Palestine prior to the end of WWI (being a region of Syria), the Palestinians were nevertheless the people of record occupying the land at the time of the British mandate. And it's no secret that Vladimir Jabotinsky, one of the leaders of the Zionist movement, had stated as early as 1925 that the Jews were going to return and occupy all of the former Israel at the expense of the Palestinian people. He understood then that the Palestinians would be determined to fight at all costs for their land, and that the Jews must be as ruthless as necessary to remove the Palestinians. Theodore Herzl, the founder of Zionism, had stated in 1896 that the Jewish people would have their own Judenstaaten, but he considered Crete, places in both South America and Africa, as well as Palestine as potential sites. But Chaim Weissman and others eventually stated that it must be Palestine.

It is easy to understand the Palestinians frustrations. Arabs fought alongside the Allies during WWI, doing so because they had been promised freedom with the fall of the Ottoman Empire. Yet when that freedom came, it came to every country but theirs. Lebanon was created from Syrian territory and liberated, but Palestine was held as a mandate of the British, because the Balfour Agreement had promised part of that land to the Jews. And even though the Jewish population made up about 30% of the total in 1948, land the land promised to them constituted less than 50% of the country, they took far more than the land that had been alloted to them. Part of the problem may have been the fact that the Allies did such a shoddy job of partitioning the land; the map looked like a patchwork quilt, as the Allies had tried to give land according to population percentages. But that doesn't excuse the land grab by the Zionists.

This is a situation that is not going to go away. Both sides are resolute in their beliefs, and their commitment to fight for what they believe is right. The notion of wiping the Palestinians out of the territory is absurd, of course, but in reality, this conflict will not go away until one side or the other ceases to exist. And that is the sad truth. JMO.

:(

Out of curiosity, adam, what the hell did any of that have to do with my two points???


"Dear Lord Rithchild, I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet. His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours tofacilitate the achievenment of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation. Signed: Arthur James Balfour".

- This was passed by the U.S., Britian and the early U.N. (league of nations)


And this - Er...if by "through military force" you mean "multiple arab nations attempted to wipe them out and in the wars because of this they captured land, and then offered it back in exchange for peace (but were, of course, refused)" -- then yes, yes you are right. - had nothing to do with what you just posted.

In fact, I'm a little confused what hte fuck you just posted that again for??

Er... The land had been promised to the Jews back when it was British land.

You are clearly talking about historical precedence for ownership or occupation of that land. Thus I provided some history, which you would do well to read for once.


Er...if by "through military force" you mean "multiple arab nations attempted to wipe them out and in the wars because of this they captured land, and then offered it back in exchange for peace (but were, of course, refused)" -- then yes, yes you are right.

No. Israel as formed by the UN was really quite a small place. Since that founding of the only Israel which is legitimate under international law, the Israelis have expanded outward through military force. It is that military expansion which prompts return fire.

Funny how everybody has their own suitable version of history

"You are clearly talking about historical precedence for ownership or occupation of that land. Thus I provided some history, which you would do well to read for once."

No, I was talking about how it was promised to Jews when Britian owned it. I'm not sure how you got that part. I never mentioned the Philistines, the Phoenicians or any other of the groups you mentioned in your little post.


"No. Israel as formed by the UN was really quite a small place. Since that founding of the only Israel which is legitimate under international law, the Israelis have expanded outward through military force."

They've offered back West Bank and Gazaa Strip and parts of Jerusalem, what, three times now? The latest time being only 3 years ago? The first time was immediatly after the war. As I recall it, Egypt said "No, that place is a terrorist haven, we don't want to bother with it" and Jordan said "No, that place is a terrorist shit-hole haven, we don't want to bother with it". Egypt did, however, accept back the Sinai desert. The PLO Constitution clearly states that the Palestinians will stop at nothing short of occupying all of what they believe belongs to the Moslem Palestinian state - that is, all of Israel.


"It is that military expansion which prompts return fire."

Er.... I think you better brush up on your logic, because I know you sure as fucking hell know at least enough history to realize this is a ridiculous comment. Immediatly when Israel was created there was war. It was not "military expansion" which prompted the war, it was the fact that none of the neighboring Arab states recognized the fact that a Jewish Israeli state existed. They simply said "no". Not because of Israel expanding, because they didn't want Israel there in the first place.

After a number of wars Israel offered back almost all of the land it had claimed in the war in exchange for peace, this was denied as the Arab nations continued to not recognize Israel as a state. Around this time the PLO began to grow and the first major act of the PLO was to vow to completely overthrow the state of Israel. In 1978 (78? 77? Arg, I forget) the Egyptian President visited Israel and the war with Egypt more or less settled down. Since then Israel's status with Jordan and all Arab states has become a little less volatile. The PLO, however, continues to wave a flag of guns crossed over a map of Israel (well, Palestine in their mind). The PLO, however, continues to hear not of peace (replying to Israeli peace offers with a promise of war in 2000). The PLO, however, continues to promise to stand by it's initial claims (of overthrowing all of Israel). The PLO, however, continues to increase Sharon's popularity in Israel immediatly before election time because it ensures war.

The PLO attacks because Israel gained land after 1948? No, the PLO attacks because, and their constitution clearly states this, they do not want Israel to be a state at all. Seeing as how you talk nice and big about your knowledge on this topic, I'm sure you've read the PLO's decleration??

No, I was talking about how it was promised to Jews when Britian owned it.

Why bring that up if not to set some historical precendent for Israelie occuptation of the land?


I'm not sure how you got that part. I never mentioned the Philistines, the Phoenicians or any other of the groups you mentioned in your little post.

Yes, you did, when you provided this quote:

"Dear Lord Rithchild, I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet. His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours tofacilitate the achievenment of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country. I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation. Signed: Arthur James Balfour".



They've offered back West Bank and Gazaa Strip and parts of Jerusalem, what, three times now? The latest time being only 3 years ago? The first time was immediatly after the war. As I recall it, Egypt said "No, that place is a terrorist haven, we don't want to bother with it" and Jordan said "No, that place is a terrorist shit-hole haven, we don't want to bother with it". Egypt did, however, accept back the Sinai desert.


1949: Israel takes by military force land linking initial settlements approved by the UN. 780,000 Palestinians displaced.
1956: Israel seeks to claim the Sinai Peninsula as a buffer zone, but withdraws on UN disapproval.
1967, 5th June, Israel strikes first in the Six Day War, and seizes control of the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza, the West Bank, and the Golan Heights, almost tripling the area under Israeli control.
Immediately after annexing those territories, Israel calls for a treaty for all the nearby Arab states to accept a permanent peace, with Israel retaining control of the lands they just claimed. Naturally everyone tells Israel to bugger off.
November 22, the UN lodges Resolution 242, calling on Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories of the states they fought with. Israel sort of accepts the resolution, by saying they will use it as a basis for future discussion.
Two months after the war, the Land Of Israel movement gets going, and soon Israeli settlements are being built on the newly occupied lands.
1972: Israeli air strikes against civilian Arabs in Lebanon begin.
1973: Egypt and Syria launch a new offensive, but peace is brokered by the USSR.
1974, 13th November: Yasser Arafat takes on the role of statesman, addressing the UN.
1974: Israeli elections return a pro-Palestinian majority in the West Bank.
1982: Israel withdraws from the Sinai after signing a peace treaty with Egypt.
1978: Israel again annexes the Golan Heights, an action concemnde by the UN.
1982, 6th June: Israel invades Lebanon.
16th September: 700 Palestinian refugees at the Sabra and Chatila refugee camps are slaughtered by christians. Eight days later, 35,000 Isaelis protest against the Israeli government for collusion in the massacre.
1986: Israel withdraws from Lebanon
1986, 1st October: Israeli jets bomb Tunis.
1988, 31st July: Jordan drops its claims to the West Bank.
1988: The PNC endorses UN resolution 242.
1988: Yasser Arafat publicly renounces terrorism.
1990, 8th October: 18 Arabs shot dead and more than a hundred injured as Isreali police open fire at Palestinian demonstrators. Israel first claims it was the fault of the Arabs, for throwing rocks at Jews at the Wailing Wall; then Israel admits there were no Jews in the area when they started shooting.
1994: Israel hands over control of Jericho and Gaza to Palestinians, and agree to withdraw also from the West Bank.
1997: Netanyahu decides to reduce withdrawal from the West Bank to only 2% of its total area.
1998: Israel agrees to withdraw from a further 13% of the West Bank. This has not been done.



The PLO Constitution clearly states that the Palestinians will stop at nothing short of occupying all of what they believe belongs to the Moslem Palestinian state - that is, all of Israel.

Good. It is actually their land. Why should they stop trying to reclaim it, when the only other occupants are savages who shoot kids? (Yes, some paramilitary groups of Palestian kill civilians, but they are not state powers. Israel, on the other hand, is a state which routinely kills children. Israel is in no way a legitimate holder of that territory.) Heck, even the UN sees that it's Palestinian land. But I guess you know better, right?


Immediatly when Israel was created there was war. It was not "military expansion" which prompted the war, it was the fact that none of the neighboring Arab states recognized the fact that a Jewish Israeli state existed. They simply said "no". Not because of Israel expanding, because they didn't want Israel there in the first place.

Read your history. The war occured because of oppression and killing of Arabs. Out of nowhere, the UN said "Rigtho chaps, you Arabs all get out of the way, and we'll drop a new country in your laps", and not content with that, Israel immediately expanded outward.


After a number of wars Israel offered back almost all of the land it had claimed in the war in exchange for peace, this was denied as the Arab nations continued to not recognize Israel as a state.

I've covered this. Israel moved in and out of some areas now and then, offered to move out of some areas entirely but then vacated instead just a few blocks, and absolutely ignored the UN resolution 242.


The PLO attacks because Israel gained land after 1948? No, the PLO attacks because, and their constitution clearly states this, they do not want Israel to be a state at all. Seeing as how you talk nice and big about your knowledge on this topic, I'm sure you've read the PLO's decleration??

1) You are talking about the "constitution" of what? Not a state. Not Palestine. A group of paramilitaries.

2) The Likkud recently voted that they would never even discuss the possibility of the Palestinians having their own state.

"Why bring that up if not to set some historical precendent for Israelie occuptation of the land?"

Because you said the UN took the land and I believe (perhaps incorrectly) that you were unaware that the Brits had stated much earlier that Israel would be a state. Again, I may very well be wrong in say you were unaware, but I've not seen you bring this point up before.


"Yes, you did, when you provided this quote:"

I posted my two "Er..." comments. Then you posted your little bit of history. Now, it seems to me that unless you are a psychic you would have no way in knowing I would later quote Balfourd. Again, I may be wrong....you may indeed by a psychic.


In relation to the 1949+ history you posted;
The Arab nations declared war in 1948, before Israel became a state.
In fact, having just read the last long post by VAKEMP, it is even stated in this thread already;
"1947
UN approves plan to partition Palestine; Jews accept partition, Arabs reject partition and prepare to oppose partition plan by force.
1948
Creation of the State of Israel. United States is the first country to recognize the newly reestablished Jewish state. Immediately, five Arab armies invade fledgling state"


"Good. It is actually their land. Why should they stop trying to reclaim it, when the only other occupants are savages who shoot kids? (Yes, some paramilitary groups of Palestian kill civilians, but they are not state powers. Israel, on the other hand, is a state which routinely kills children. Israel is in no way a legitimate holder of that territory.) Heck, even the UN sees that it's Palestinian land. But I guess you know better, right?"

Okay, now I have a serious question. I've read many a debate on this site (and participated in a few, as they get repetitive it seems useless) and many a times talked to pro-Palestinian folk. It is a common comment to say Israeli's shoot civilians. But this?
-- "Yes, some paramilitary groups of Palestian kill civilians, but they are not state powers. Israel, on the other hand, is a state which routinely kills children" --
You don't honestly believe what you just wrote, do you? Do you consider the PLO group the equivlant to the Israeli government? You, along with most pro-Palestinians, seem to argue from that position. And you do, of course, recognize the fact htat Arafat has always been able to say "no killings" and have Hamas listen, right? And you do, of course, recognize that many terrorist attacks (including one which killed 23 civilians quite recently) are orchestrated and carried out by the Araffat's military wing, eh?

Hmmmm, although you do provide an excellent excuse for your side in the debate. According to you the PLO has no power over Hamas? Or it's own military wing? So then Araffat has never done anything bad, never encouraged terrorism (oops, well, I guess we can excuse all the times he's clearly stated all Palestinians should focus on eliminating Israel) and has no part in suicide bombings?


"Read your history. The war occured because of oppression and killing of Arabs. Out of nowhere, the UN said "Rigtho chaps, you Arabs all get out of the way, and we'll drop a new country in your laps", and not content with that, Israel immediately expanded outward."

Actually, Israel united it's territories. Look, I'm not about to deny that Israel has made some poor moves. However, you're quite, quite wrong in saying that Arab nations only wanted war because Israel expanded. It's a ridiculous statement. You, of course, have fully accepted the fact that the PLO wants all of Israel gone; so I don't even know why you're debating this. Just admitt you made a mistake ("It is that military expansion which prompts return fire.") and we'll move on.


"I've covered this. Israel moved in and out of some areas now and then, offered to move out of some areas entirely but then vacated instead just a few blocks, and absolutely ignored the UN resolution 242."

Er...(gotta love the Er)...offered to move out of some areas? Was it not the PLO who stated that their mission (well, they stated this in English. they stated quite differently in other languages) was to occupy West Bank and Gazaa Strip and such and then, when offered these territories, denied? Twice?


"1) You are talking about the "constitution" of what? Not a state. Not Palestine. A group of paramilitaries."

No, the PLO. And excuse my use of the term constitution, it was a mistake. "National Charter" is actually what it's called. Of course Adam, you ahve read it? I mean, arguing without having read that is like bad-mouthing Islam without reading the Qu'ran.


"2) The Likkud recently voted that they would never even discuss the possibility of the Palestinians having their own state."

And how nice a job the PLO is doing at making sure Likkud never gets out of power! Now, here's a little bit of logic...
- Israeli opinion of Sharon was going far down
- Israeli's have a history of voting (or feeling like voting, in the case of no election around) right wing the more dangerous they feel
- No suicide bombings means they feel safer
- Hamas hadn't attacked in a while, so what did the PLO do? Well they sent a bunch of gunmen into Israel (four, three of which were picked off before being able to kill. one of whom did shot an elderly man) and (duh-duh-da-duh) two suicide bombers, successfully killing 23 Israelis and making the voters more likely to once again vote right-wing.

Smart move, eh?

Adam , your version of history is very diffrent than mine, but I do not see it as black and white as you do. Are you willing to say that some of the times some of the arabs a little bit misbehave? maybe the PLO guys that entered a Kibbutz in Israel and shot to death a mother and two baby kids from point blank between the eyes? and don't tell me that they were paramilitary group and that poor Arafat condemes it!
Tell me the diffrence between the American operation in Afganistan, the killing of four suspects in Yeman and the Israeli responses. (or maybe as you put it might is right and America is beyond critique)

I guess to your method 9/11 was also conducted by Israel or because of israel. (they are annoyed etc. the poor guys)


All Israelis should pull back into the smaller area initially outlined by the UN resolution which gave them some land there in the first place. They should entirely vacate the rest of Palestine and Lebanon


If you are refering to 47 borders then forget it! But rather if you are willing to settle for the 67 borders with the right of return to the new Palestinen state only and compansation for all othes who choose to stay where they are ten we might agree here on something.
The problem I have, and from what I read from you so far is that just like Arafat you will not agree for these terms. So does the Hamas the Huzzbela and the various military fractions of the PLO. Maybe you will prove me wrong.

If you are refering to 47 borders then forget it!
ethan, why is the 47 borders not acceptable?

I posted my two "Er..." comments. Then you posted your little bit of history. Now, it seems to me that unless you are a psychic you would have no way in knowing I would later quote Balfourd. Again, I may be wrong....you may indeed by a psychic.

First you quoted Balfour, then you said: "No, I was talking about how it was promised to Jews when Britian owned it. I'm not sure how you got that part. I never mentioned the Philistines, the Phoenicians or any other of the groups you mentioned in your little post." Your quote of Balfour mentions Palestinians, which is mentioning Philistines and Phoenicians and the rest.


1948
Creation of the State of Israel. United States is the first country to recognize the newly reestablished Jewish state. Immediately, five Arab armies invade fledgling state"

Yeah, in response to what amounts to an invasion.


You don't honestly believe what you just wrote, do you? Do you consider the PLO group the equivlant to the Israeli government? You, along with most pro-Palestinians, seem to argue from that position. And you do, of course, recognize the fact htat Arafat has always been able to say "no killings" and have Hamas listen, right? And you do, of course, recognize that many terrorist attacks (including one which killed 23 civilians quite recently) are orchestrated and carried out by the Araffat's military wing, eh?

1) Prove a connection between Yasser Arafat and any terrorist acts since he renounced terrorism.

2) Yasser has been losing more and more power and control over any and all terrorist groups over the last decade or so. Why? Because Yasser must walk a very fine line between: satisfying the more vehement Palestinians; and trying to keep the outside world on his side. He is stuck in the middle. He has no solid connection to any terrorist groups or attacks.


Hmmmm, although you do provide an excellent excuse for your side in the debate.

I think you misunderstand what "my side" is. I hate Israel. I hate the Arabs who attack Israeli civilians. I hate the USA for supporting the IDF.

My "side" is:

Israel should pull back to its initial territories as outlined by the UN.
Palestinian terrorists should go away or die.
The IDF should go away or die.



According to you the PLO has no power over Hamas? Or it's own military wing? So then Araffat has never done anything bad, never encouraged terrorism (oops, well, I guess we can excuse all the times he's clearly stated all Palestinians should focus on eliminating Israel) and has no part in suicide bombings?

Not since the late 70s I think.


Actually, Israel united it's territories.

By taking land off Palestinians.


Look, I'm not about to deny that Israel has made some poor moves. However, you're quite, quite wrong in saying that Arab nations only wanted war because Israel expanded. It's a ridiculous statement.

I just gave you a very long list of incidents in Israeli modern history. Ignore them if you wish.


You, of course, have fully accepted the fact that the PLO wants all of Israel gone; so I don't even know why you're debating this.

No, I would say the PLO wants Israel to follow UN resolution 242; that is their stated goal.


Just admitt you made a mistake ("It is that military expansion which prompts return fire.") and we'll move on.

Again: I have given you a rather extensive list of major points in Israeli modern history. I ask you here and now to deny any of them.


Er...(gotta love the Er)...offered to move out of some areas? Was it not the PLO who stated that their mission (well, they stated this in English. they stated quite differently in other languages) was to occupy West Bank and Gazaa Strip and such and then, when offered these territories, denied? Twice?

No, you've got it very wrong. Israel said they would vacate those territories, then didn't.


No, the PLO. And excuse my use of the term constitution, it was a mistake. "National Charter" is actually what it's called. Of course Adam, you ahve read it? I mean, arguing without having read that is like bad-mouthing Islam without reading the Qu'ran.

Yes, I read it when someone posted it here a while back. It is the charter of a political organisation without a state. Much like the WTO or UN, but of course smaller by an order or magnitude.


And how nice a job the PLO is doing at making sure Likkud never gets out of power! Now, here's a little bit of logic...
- Israeli opinion of Sharon was going far down
- Israeli's have a history of voting (or feeling like voting, in the case of no election around) right wing the more dangerous they feel
- No suicide bombings means they feel safer
- Hamas hadn't attacked in a while, so what did the PLO do? Well they sent a bunch of gunmen into Israel (four, three of which were picked off before being able to kill. one of whom did shot an elderly man) and (duh-duh-da-duh) two suicide bombers, successfully killing 23 Israelis and making the voters more likely to once again vote right-wing.

Nice conspiracy theory. But that's all you've got.

Adam , your version of history is very diffrent than mine, but I do not see it as black and white as you do. Are you willing to say that some of the times some of the arabs a little bit misbehave? maybe the PLO guys that entered a Kibbutz in Israel and shot to death a mother and two baby kids from point blank between the eyes? and don't tell me that they were paramilitary group and that poor Arafat condemes it!

This is what I meant about you having a chip on your shoulders. If someone says "The IDF shot s little girl this morning", you would make a massive negative accusation such as "You like NAZIs!!!" Sure, it's a extreme example, but that is how you behave. I do not at all say "some of the arabs a little bit misbehave". I don't know where you get that stupid idea of yours from.

And yes, Arafat does condemn terorist acts by Palestinians, publicly.


Tell me the diffrence between the American operation in Afganistan, the killing of four suspects in Yeman and the Israeli responses.

Afghanistan: The Taliba