Israel & Palestine (v2)

Discussion in 'Politics' started by hypewaders, Oct 23, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    Yes. It is clearly a quagmire of title deeds, ownership disputes, etc. And right or wrong, I am not convinced that wading through the legalities of all this would really be helpful in regard to Palestinian statehood at the moment.

    Right now, my hopes are for, sustained peace and ceasefire, (hopefully Shalit will be released soon, that will please his family), Palestinian unity, and looking towards justice and a sovereign Palestinian State in a the near future. What is clear, is that the bloodshed must end, the past needs to be put on the back burner, and all eyes need to look forward.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    Um sorry but your wrong. in fact the jews created the precedent or was it wrong to strip all the children of nazis their illgotten gains?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    I'm not

    So trying to defend against jerwish aggression blew their chance?
    7 and their was no invasion. invasions require enter the territory of said group.
    because of outside influence.
    They aren't sorry losers the law is on the palestinian side.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    what laws were broken? a moral doesn't mean criminal.

    their is nothing hypocritcal about it. Though I will admit if you don't do the research and not understand it could look like that.


    Um I have repeatedly over the course of this topic made references. and I know about the rule of law not to cast it aside simply because i like the side breaking it.

    you mean the arab response to the disspossion of the palestinians? They cannot be blamed for getting rid of their jewish population when Israel had just used even the smallest jewish population as an excuse to atatck and annex land.
    you mean stolen.

    I care. though that situation is more complecated because both sides have have leget claims of roughly equal strength.
    Words cannot describe just how idiocitic this statement is. the land was given to poland because of land the USSR STOLE to placate poland. the countries involved agreed.
    no they don't because it involves reflecting modern values to the past.
     
  8. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    yes butunlike this case no denied they were apeoples

    I have explained why. the natives signed treaties legetimaizing the land grabs.

    that's an excuse criminals and the dishonest love.
    Wrong. simple existence doesn't confer legitimacy. I find it funny you wish to claim Israel is legit but use the arguments to support despots and rebels to make your claim.
    poland was restored(although in poland's case the lands were taken by valid states and the poles were allowed to stay on their own lands) after 150 years.
    not really understanding the differences are we?
    ensure being hated because of their brutality is winning?

    nice sentiment grounded in bigotry.
     
  9. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    no one is talking about that land except where anthoer wealthy arab sold land that wasn't his top give. we are talking about the land seized during the war of jewish aggression.

    so the fact they had deeds dating back to the mid 1800's means they didn't own the land? not that it matters it could be shown every homes stolen was owned by the palestiunian and you would still say they had no right to them simply because they aren't jewish.
     
  10. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    interestingly enough the USA could be breaking US law(the US constitution staets that treaties are the equalvilent of federal law)by recognizing Israel outside of its un given borders(not that it truly has a right to them but the diehard Israel supporters will never cede this and I am willing to cede returning it to the pals for a time) because everything else was gained in war by force.


    the montevideo conventions prohibits signers to recognizing gains through force which most of what is "Israel" is gained through force this puts the special relationship of "Israel" and the US in a sticky situation.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2009
  11. CheskiChips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,538
    Are you sure you're not a racist?


    Then blame the Jordanians, Saudi Arabians, Iranians, Lebanese, Egyptians, Moroccans for being absentee landlords. Not the Israelis for being savy businessmen.


    And please consolidate your posts in the future.
     
  12. otheadp Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,853
    Wtf are the scare-quotes supposed to mean?
    Because some nut wrote a book, his hateful blithering is now treated as gospel? Should I cite KKK doctrine as "proof" of one thing or another?
     
  13. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    yes.




    I blame them for selling land that wasn't theirs and the jews for not caring about the legality. and they couldn't be to savy if they didn't know the people had no right to sell it but more likely they didn't care. hell you yourself show the same if their not jewish they don't matter in regards to Israel/palestine thast the Israelis do.


    different post to reply to and different people I will do seperately.
     
  14. CheskiChips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,538
    So...how come a population Jews / Bedouins / British / Arabs all fighting for the creation of an Israeli state that has a total population less than 10% of the Jewish population is considered the "Jewish war of aggression". Admit to your anti-Semitism, or change your terms.
     
  15. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    What in G_d`s name are scare quotes? :m:
    Some nut? No, you are exposing your ignorance.
    I am pointing out your lack of debating skillz in attempting to attack the messenger. The message is sound and backed up by credible evidence. Feel free to analyze and debate any points therein. :m:
    How you make this leap only G_d knows.
     
  16. otheadp Banned Banned

    Messages:
    5,853
    Scare quotes are these: "".

    As for the "message" of that nut that you cited, even you yourself don't believe what he wrote (which, by the way, I bet you never even read!) because you would then at least attempt to argue it. All you're doing instead is claiming it's "good research".

    A guy walking downtown, pestering passersby with flyers about a government conspiracy to implant microchips into citizens' arms to spy on them has more credibility than that idiot.
     
  17. CheskiChips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,538
    Tel-Aviv secularists are even more extreme than British intellectuals...they're the craziest most liberal and secular individuals on the planet bar none. Many of them would truly prefer no religion existed - no nations - and propose policies that border despotism, much like university intellectuals world wide only more extreme. That's who you've cited.
     
  18. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    So you are psychic eh?
    So anyone who holds opposing views to your own is an "idiot"? (note scare quotes)
    You gotta love democracy. :m:

    A easily digestible interview - on topic.
    etc.
     
  19. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    And that is one of the things that makes me proud. Theres a fire burning like no other. :m:

    You are, I assume familiar with his humanitarian views?
     
  20. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    because the war was started due to jewish aggression. funny and here you are claiming the british supported the arabs. I guess whatever suits the current rant
    I'm not anti semitic. no matter how much you want it to be criticism of Israel and opposing Israel's existence based on facts is not anti semitic.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2009
  21. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    The attacks agianst Israeli civlians in conquered lands IMO shows why the geneva conventions prohibits transfering civlians into occupied lands not that Israel's supports think much of Israel violating it.
     
  22. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    can't recognize something that isn't true. no matter how much you want me to be an anti semite I'm not.
    It is a critical of Israel's founder whop were jews.
    and yet they decided to act on behalf of them.
    and they were ignored.
    So all the times in the past when you said the british favored the arabs and not the jews you were lying? and show where the arabs fought for the creation of a state to dissposses them and you do know the Bedouin are arab.

    I have yet to see you do anything that resembles fair. I'm not an anti semite that would mean I hate jews because they are jews. I do not. I dislike them for the disspossession of the palestinians and their still trying to play the victims after words. My dislike of Israel is based on facts not blind hatred.



    Once again in your quest to defend the indefensible in Israel you show why people dislike jews. being against Israel isn't anti semitic if its based on facts.
     
  23. CheskiChips Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,538
    Defend one point you just made with a reputable source, please, if you can. Wikipedia doesn't count. It has to be a .gov, a history book, a reputable journal...please...please try.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page