Palestinian PM: We'll form de facto state by 2011

Have the arabs ever tried to completely destroy another people? have the arabs ever denied refugees their rights simply because it shows that they didn't have the population to warrent a country. No other nation except for maybe the USSR and the USA have as flagrently violated international law.

what about knowingly attacking unarmed vessals of a nuetral ally?

I never said they weren't attacked but they have attacked far more than they have been attacked.

I would hope to god you pick up a real history book and learn though I doubt you have to much at stack in supporting Israel.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

no you haven't evidence on;y goes back 3000 years. and yes you are europeans and not Israelis. You were never Israelis you were Judeans

and yet you were more European or american than you were ISraeli.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

And so they were. It didn't seem to help anything. Now what?

Is that what they tell you in India?

I have a hard time taking that sort of rhetoric seriously coming from a country that gave up on armed resistance to British imperialism, and remains a member of the Commonwealth.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Which is why your military supports the settlers and the encroach and Israel gave up the Sinai over american and british pressure they wanted to keep it.

No you wouldn't because than you would have shown your true colors and nations who could do something about it would.,

 

Israel is a bullshit bigoted state that even discriminates against jews. a reform juadiam marriage is not considered valid if performed in Israel

 

Same thing as is true for all externally supported governments in the middle east, people do not get tired of resisting oppression.

Lets just say they could not kill enough of us to get another United States or Australia. Perhaps they were defeated by our exposure to diseases prior to their arrival.

 

And if this doesn't ameliorate the oppression, then what?

Perhaps there are more productive courses than "resistance" and punitive "attack."

Like forging ahead with actual state-building, and so gaining the associated autonomy and respect.

They were defeated (in the sense of being able to sustain large overseas holdings) by the other world powers in the World Wars. India didn't have substantial agency in bringing about the end of the British Empire: for that, look to the USA, Germany, Japan and Russia. Had they not been squeezed by competition with other superpowers, Britain would have been able to hold India indefinitely. After all, they withstood centuries of Indian disease and resistance prior to that.

And they had sufficient power to destroy the population, if that was what they'd wanted to do. But large-scale population replacement was never an organized part of Western colonialism; where it happened, it occurred by accident, as the result of the inadvertant introduction of diseases the natives had low resistance to.

 

You cannot gain autonomy in an occupation, ask the native Americans.

Is that what they told you? You must have missed out the razing of villages [and villagers], population transfers and large scale resource stealing in all of the above.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

To "gain autonomy" is exactly the same as to end occupation. So if you're arguing that's impossible, then what's the point of resistance?

And please stop pretending that my neighbors and countrymen are on your side. It's offensive for you to speak for them, given your near-total obliviousness to their histories, cultures and self-images.

No, I know about all of that. We just don't have the psychological impetus to exaggerate this stuff to genocide proportions. If the British had wanted to eliminate the population, they certainly possessed the material and technical means to do so. But that's not what they were interested in: they wanted control of the population, not its elimination.

And they achieved exactly that, for many decades in the face of local resistance and diseases, right up until their riches were drained fighting off the Axis powers (and compromising promises regarding their overseas possessions extracted by the United States in exchange for support). So it's difficult to believe that Indian resistance was decisive.

 

Well - and my apologies to James for, yes, diverging again - but you and pj constantly allude that the Palestinians have only been on the receiving end, and that there would never have been war or violence against the Jews if not for the formation of the state of Israel. This is clearly false, as the link shows, unless you feel that Saladin himself was possessed of sufficient precognition to dictate that the Jews needed to be oppressed to prevent Israel being reborn. Rather, it would seem - based on its religious nature - to fit into ayah 9: 29 - "And make them [Jews and Christians] to feel oppressed". I regret to say that this is not an uncommon meme.

Don't be disingenuous. The result of an Arab victory would have been widespread massacre and forced eviction much as the rhetoric of the Arab leaders of the nations around Israel proclaimed, and much like that shrieked by the Grand Muffy himself. Eviction - being the best case scenario - would have been, at best, not at all unlike that of numerous Jews in every single Middle Eastern country after 1948. Please, please don't be dishonest about this issue. It's important enough that it requires forthright and reasoned answers.

 

Apologies.

Now, on topic: I support such an endeavour. Will it meet with violence? Well, quite possibly.

 

I'm not being dishonest.

 

And so on and so forth:

emphasis and editing mine

So what should the Palestinians do about these foreign squatters now?

The ones who will not let them breathe? Whats the solution?

 

There could be several. Anschluss with Israel? No, because that would be the Israelis cutting their own throat. Ah - Anschluss with Jordan. No, because Jordan couldn't give less of a fuck.

 

Fayyad will build a few things, but then it'll all have to be bombed because the rejectionist camp will hijack the "peace" process and bomb Israel a few times, so in retaliation it'll all have to be destroyed.

HAMAS and "Palestinian" Islamic Jihad are known rejectionists, but Fatah members are almost exclusively just as rejectionist. The difference between them and HAMAS is that HAMAS is more clear about its wishes. While Fatah are more moderate than HAMAS, they are still bloodthirsty killers whose leadership is dedicated to a terrorist war (armed "resistance"). To see proof, just google the minutes from their latest election.

Jokes.

I feel sorry for Fayyad and the tiny segment of the "Palestinian" population that actually working hard to try and create that infrastructure. What they are building, and what Israelis are hoping will succeed, will fail. At least this time. Maybe in 15 - 20 years it will work when the generation of Jew hating Islamist zombies that HAMAS has created will be replaced by a new generation that recognizes that Israelis and Jews are human.

 

what about on topic propaganda like otheadp's

 

Please enlighten us with citation, reference, and source material for this bigoted biliousness.