Why The Palestinians? And Why The Jews?

[markjh]

Leon de Winter: Why The Palestinians? And Why The Jews?

In recent weeks at least as many people have died in violence on the borders of Congo and Sudan as during Israel’s recent operations in Gaza – yet a large part of Europe’s media has paid hardly any attention to the violence in Africa.

What do the Palestinians have that the Congolese and Sudanese don’t? Do Europeans love Palestinians for their extraordinary artistic and scientific contributions to the world?

There is one quality that Palestinians can certainly claim: for generations they have managed to preserve their status as refugees. Of the countless millions of displaced persons and peoples seeking refuge in the years following the Second World War, only the Palestinians have succeeded in remaining permanent refugees with their own exclusive United Nations organization. Sixty years on, Palestinian towns are still called refugee camps; four generations of Palestinians have been labeled refugee from birth.

What other qualities do Palestinian victims have that prompts Europe’s media to focus so much attention on them? Nowhere in Europe have demonstrators protested against the Arab terrorists who try to undermine Iraq’s burgeoning democratic process, even though the number of Iraqi victims of terrorist violence is many times greater than the number of victims in Gaza.

What is so special about the Palestinians that causes Europe – and by now, most media in the world - to focus on them so intensively?
The Palestinians in Gaza voted for a religious-fascist party whose fundamental aim is to annihilate the state of Israel. Passionately, Hamas promised war and martyrdom. At its mass rallies in Gaza their leaders screamed for bloody confrontation. Their two main slogans sounded like: ‘Every Palestinian loves death more than life - No sacrifice is too great to bring an end to Israel’. That was the message propagated by Hamas in its media, by the Mullahs in Tehran, by Hizbollah in Lebanon.

Well, Israel offered the inhabitants of Gaza - who voted en masse for a party that promotes the genocide of the Jews throughout the world - what those inhabitants wish more than anything else in life, so they keep on telling the whole wide world: an opportunity to heroically resist and destroy the Jews. Yet instead of expressing profound satisfaction of the chance to fight the Jews, the Palestinians cried out that they were being treated disproportionately and that the Jews shouldn’t be allowed to shoot at women and children. The same people who screamed for violence and war, showed the media how bad they were treated by the Jews they wished to destroy in violence and war.

Imagine what would have happened if Hamas had Israel’s arsenal. Would the islamo-fascist fighters have stuck to ethical guidelines? When Samir Kuntar, the Palestinian who in 1979 crushed the skull of a 4-year old girl with the butt of his rifle, was released by Israel last July, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh congratulated Kuntar for ‘the great victory of the resistance, which proved the rightness of our way’.

For years, Hamas has been firing rockets at Israel, and Europe’s media has shrugged its bored shoulders. In a bloody civil war in June 2007, Hamas expelled so-called moderate Fatah from Gaza; the media registered the events without emotion. Every day, Hamas leaders promise the Jews a painful death; Europe yawns. And when the provocation becomes too much for Israel to bear, and Israel responds by hitting Hamas with a fraction of what Hamas wishes it could throw against Israel, journalists converge on Tel Aviv airport to report the cruel deaths of women and children and Israel’s overwhelming military strength.

Why are these journalists incapable of understanding that Hamas would rather die firing rockets at Israel than do whatever needs to be done to protect its own children? What do Palestinians have which so fascinates Europeans that far worse conflicts around the world, such as Putin’s demolition of Chechnya, pale into insignificance?

The answer is that Palestinians have an enemy which is Europe’s obsession: the Jew. Ancient, civilized Europe has never been a safe haven for Jews. With its national and ethnic divisions, this continent has always found the Jew, just like the wandering Gipsy, the last nomad of the continent, incomprehensible and dangerous. Jew-haters feared the Jew since the Jew was smart and flexible; the Jew blended in more easily but remained loyal to the Hebrew tribe. The machinations of the Jew could explain anything that was wrong on earth – anti-Semitism is the ultimate conspiracy theory. And it has spread from Europe to most corners of the earth. In a globalizing era, in the middle of incomprehensible economic disorder, the scheming Jew can be used, even in countries without Jews, as the classic explanation of why things are bad and threatening.

The eradication of the Jews of Europe was the organic result of a process that lasted a thousand years. And Europe has never come to terms with the consequences of its Holocaust. On the contrary, since decades the continent feels blackmailed and held to ransom by the Jews. Europe’s sympathy for the Palestinians has nothing to do with the unique Palestinian spirit or the circumstances in which Palestinians live – Europe loves the Palestinians because it is Europe’s way of ridding itself of its guilt for the mass murder of its Jews.

Yasser Arafat, a traditional, corrupt Arab warlord, had the remarkable insight in the 1960s to repackage the Palestinian cause in anti-imperialist rhetoric, and so turn the Palestinian case into the cause of Europe’s leftist intelligentsia (RAF, the radical leftist German terrorist movement, worked closely with Palestinian terrorists). The massacres by Christian militias at the refugee camps of Sabra and Chatila in 1982 opened the first cracks in the taboo against criticism of Jews which had been an unwritten law in European public life since 1945; the first Intifada, with its images of stone-throwing Palestinians facing heavily armed Jewish soldiers festooned in the world’s press, cleared the way for a vilification of Israel that turned increasingly into an attack on Jewish arrogance and, maybe more important, an attack on Israeli and Jewish misuse of the legacy of the Holocaust.

Responsible European politicians – and there are many - are aware of the dangers of Islamic religious fascism and, despite heavy pressure of parts of the media, try to preserve a balanced perspective (in the midst of the Gaza-storm in the media, these political elites didn’t condemn Israel), but no other conflict in the world, whether it involves hundreds of thousands or millions of victims, excites as much European emotion as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Europe is obsessed by it.

By placing Israel’s defensive actions in a selective, magnified perspective, European media is able to portray the heirs of the victims of Europe’s most obscene hatred - anti-Semitism - as vile perpetrators, and so finally to release Europe from its dead Jews.

It is clear to whoever has some conscience and knowledge that, even if thousands of innocent bystanders had died in Gaza, there would still be no comparison with Nazi Germany’s annihilation of the Jews – and yet left-wing and Muslim protestors and media commentators constantly use terms such as Holocaust and Nazi to describe Israel’s response to Hamas terrorism. Thus they reduce the magnitude and seriousness of Nazism, and suggest by implication that the conniving Jews may even hold some share in the blame for their suffering under the Nazis.

It would be wrong to blame all Europeans of senseless Jew-hatred, but there is an old and strong ‘ressentiment’ hiding in Europe’s underbelly - a recent survey by the Anti-Defamation League in 7 European countries indicates that 31 percent of adults blame Jews in the financial industry for the economic meltdown. This survey also made clear that criticism of Israel and having an opinion of Jews became synonymous: 58 percent admitted that they like Jews less due to Israel’s politics. The ADL didn’t ask these European adults whether they also have a low opinion of adherents to the Russian Orthodox Church due to the destruction of Grozny and the killing of tens of thousands of Muslim Chechens by the Russian army.

By demonizing Israel’s six million Jews, even though they are merely defending themselves against an enemy motivated by blind religious hatred, Europe is expressing its burning desire to at last get rid of the six million dead. Europe will not forgive the Jews the burden of Auschwitz.

That is why the hundreds killed in Gaza are so much more significant in Europe than the millions who have died in Darfur and Congo. Just like other human beings, Jews didn’t learn much from history, but they know one thing for sure: it repeats itself.
http://www.achgut.com/dadgdx/index.php/dadgd/article/leon_de_winter_why_the_palestinians_and_why_the_jews1/

[charpan]

ur just in the wrong neighborhood bro.

[futurepilot2004]

Europe loves the Palestinians because it is Europe’s way of ridding itself of its guilt for the mass murder of its Jews.

Europe will not forgive the Jews the burden of Auschwitz.

what a load of crap.

[budgie]

Europe loves the Palestinians because it is Europe’s way of ridding itself of its guilt for the mass murder of its Jews.


Once again the pro-Israel crowd fails to see the problem objectively. Europe condemns Israel's heavy-handedness therefore they must be against the Jews. Bravo. Anything short of recognizing Israel's indisputable right to govern all of the promised land and expell every last Palestinian must be anti-semitism right?

It can't be that simple. Both peoples have to live there and this is something the extremists on both sides (and on the other side of the atlantic) need to grasp. The Palestinians must have their own state too eventually. This is not a matter of personal preference or biblical prophecy or favoring one side over the other. A two-state solution is the only possible end to this chaos.

Apart from that, it is an age-old conflict that threatens and destabilizes the whole region and by extent the rest of the world. The Palestine problem fuels worldwide terror and jeopardizes energy supplies, and that's why it gets more attention than Congo. Not because Europeans are feeling uneasy about the Jews.

[juliannicholas]

so if israel and palestine make peace tomorrow do you think bin laden would put down his weapons and declare universal love for mankind?

do you think the shias and sunnis will stop slaughtering eachother?

I think the ones that are destabilizing the region are the ones who one to annihilate eachother

[Player]

Leon de Winter: Why The Palestinians? And Why The Jews?

http://www.achgut.com/dadgdx/index.php/dadgd/article/leon_de_winter_why_the_palestinians_and_why_the_jews1/

What a load of crap.

I'm so bored of some loonies who always feel sorry for themselves and who suffer from a paranoia that the whole world is against them whilst doing exactly the same - turning themselves against everyone.

[sisqo]

Not left or right...but the article does have good points. I mean......worst sh8t is going on around the world and Hamas.....c'mon....Hamas???? Talk to Hamas??? LOL.....Nothing will make Hamas happy until we all worship they sadistic, medieval version of they "Allah".....lol

[Moledet]

budgie, why doesn't Europe condemn Sri Lanka's heavy-handedness? There was no conflict to this day that shows the world's hypocrisy as much as this one. Two operations that started at about the same time, one ended in 3 weeks, the other is still on the way. One is filled with blood libels on blood thirsty Jews and the other although has what seems like confirmed violations of international law doesn't even get a single headline on the back of the newspaper. One had every hour reports on the number of casualties even though no one had a clue while the other that has at least 4 times the civilian casualties you have to read ten articles to find anything about the death toll.

BTW, most terrorism in the world isn't directed against Israel no matter how you look at it. If Israel was such a major factor in causing terrorism you would see a lot more attacks on Israeli civilians, though most attacks seem to be against Iraqis, Lebanese, Pakistani and Afghans nations that hardly has anything to do with Israel. You will not cause any stability in the region through peace with Israel, you can cause the exact opposite as we see in Gaza.

[budgie]

so if israel and palestine make peace tomorrow do you think bin laden would put down his weapons and declare universal love for mankind?

do you think the shias and sunnis will stop slaughtering eachother?

I think the ones that are destabilizing the region are the ones who one to annihilate eachother

No but that again is oversimplifying the problem. Just because there will still be other concerns doesn't mean the Israelis and Palestinians shouldn't stop fighting each other. In any case it will continue for some time.

[Toolhead]

Leon de Winter: Why The Palestinians? And Why The Jews?

http://www.achgut.com/dadgdx/index.php/dadgd/article/leon_de_winter_why_the_palestinians_and_why_the_jews1/



what a load of ****.

[natulusha]

once upon a time THE TURKS have gone to safe palestiinians from eu.but the palestinians fought against to us because of english.and now they are paying the prize with their blood.
regards......

[natulusha]

ps: eu (especially england) and usa

[Holycrusader]

once upon a time THE TURKS have gone to safe palestiinians from eu.but the palestinians fought against to us because of english.and now they are paying the prize with their blood.
regards......

This post really takes time to understanding...

By Turks you mean occupation by Ottoman Empire? it could be a suprise for you but being under Ottoman or Turks rule do not make people happy at that time.

[4X4Driver]

Yes,yes..you both are right...so let's just keep the Turks out of this thread. The thread has absolutelly nothing to do with us Turks what's so ever. Let's not contribute to the derailing of the original topic please.

[natulusha]

yeah ı mean ottoman.when we were so strong there as no problem in m.east or kosova or ıraq.they were living at the peace.but tafter the balkanian war we werent be strong like as before...

[Kitsune]

It's a disgusting article. (It's about Gaza and a few month old, but it is still disgusting). The core sentence is probably:

The eradication of the Jews of Europe was the organic result of a process that lasted a thousand years.
Not that this is true. The so-called Holocaust was not the logical endpoint of German, let alone of European, history - it rather was the result of the decisions of comparably very few people. If only a few things would have happened differently (like Hitler being run over by a car in 1927, or him never coming to power in Germany on account of the world's economic crisis not happening in 1929), it would not have happened. But it shows the author's attitude: with that one statement, the final verdict is passed about Europe and its history.


Another interesting quote is this one:
On the contrary, since decades the continent feels blackmailed and held to ransom by the Jews.Says the author. Hasn't he noticed that he seems to be doing just that? "You must not pay greater attention to the dead in Gaza than to those in Darfur, if you do, I call you anti-semites. Probably you are preparing new gas chambers just now - filthy Nazis, all of you."

As if it would be unusual for Europeans, Americans, indeed the whole world, to pay less attention to death in Africa compared to somewhere else. Just consider how everyone was abuzz for months because of the slighty-over-two-thousand dead of 9/11, while a much larger number of dead in Congo do not cause much of a stir. Heck, even the 800.000 people, wo were chopped to pieces in Ruanda, caused less of a ruckus, if anyone remembers. It may be disgustingly unfair, but that is the way it is.

[Cedan]

The reason people are so upset over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that its whitey killing colored people, same with the Rhodesian war, or the South African border war, Iraq war etc. However, when blacks starts killing blacks nobody cares, just look at Rwanda, Sudan/Darfur, Congo, Sri Lanka etc

[Jurinko]

Europe loves the Palestinians because it is Europe’s way of ridding itself of its guilt for the mass murder of its Jews.

Europe will not forgive the Jews the burden of Auschwitz.

Pretty spot on. Plus Israel is an American ally, so you have two-in-one.

Passed grandfather of my wife was offered a big house after deported Jews during the WWII. He refused, despite all propaganda; but many people gladly took the property of deported Jews. Even their ancestors today have the most anti-Jewish attitude; obviously hidden guilt syndrome.

On the other side, there are many our people awarded by "Righteous between the nations" award for risking their lives when helping our Jews to survive during the WWII.

[Eye]

The reason people are so upset over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that its whitey killing colored people,
They are white or coloured in the same way. They both are Semites.

[MostlyHarmless]

As long as both sides continue to insist that the land of Israel belongs to them and only them, the killing will continue. And it is my belief that some want it to continue, people like Al Qaeda and its leaders. I believe the European media's fascination with the Palestinians is because the way they are contained within a land that a few generations ago was theirs is just difficult for most to believe. Europeans and Americans are typically appalled by the idea that a group could have their movement and living space so restricted as the Palestinians. It feel that both Europe and the US see shadows of darker elements of their past, and so concentrate on them. The reason Isreal gets so much focus is becuase westerners don't expect a democracy to behave the way Isreal does. African quasi-democracies sluaghtering their citizens is old news, unfortunatly. Just my two cents.

[coolieno99]

... Jew-haters feared the Jew since the Jew was smart and flexible; the Jew blended in more easily but remained loyal to the Hebrew tribe...And they acquired a generous portion of the wealth of the host country in the process.
This is the crux of the problem, for the last 2,000 years.

[Lau]

The reason people are so upset over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that its whitey killing colored people, same with the Rhodesian war, or the South African border war, Iraq war etc. However, when blacks starts killing blacks nobody cares, just look at Rwanda, Sudan/Darfur, Congo, Sri Lanka etc

They look the same to me pal. You think all Jews are White American Jews? :roll:

Anyway, the article is BS. Yes, some Europeans tend to look the Palestinian way, but that has to do with the Palestinians being the 'underdogs', they look sad, and live in **** holes.. The ones with the least always gets the support of the so called 'commie' media in Europe.



The eradication of the Jews of Europe was the organic result of a process that lasted a thousand years.


No, the eradication of the Jews was Hitlers idea, the rest of us were and is, fine with Jews.



Europe loves the Palestinians because it is Europe’s way of ridding itself of its guilt for the mass murder of its Jews.


Wrong, myself, and 99,9% of all Europeans don't feel any guilt for what happened in Germany during WW2, why should we?



and yet left-wing and Muslim protestors and media commentators constantly use terms such as Holocaust and Nazi to describe Israel’s response to Hamas terrorism. Thus they reduce the magnitude and seriousness of Nazism, and suggest by implication that the conniving Jews may even hold some share in the blame for their suffering under the Nazis.



Muslim protesters? Yea, they say the darndest things..

Media commentators? Give me one example, and not from some obscure rightwing magazine..



a recent survey by the Anti-Defamation League in 7 European countries indicates that 31 percent of adults blame Jews in the financial industry for the economic meltdown.


There are 3 kinds of lies; White lies, Black lies, and statistics...


By demonizing Israel’s six million Jews, even though they are merely defending themselves against an enemy motivated by blind religious hatred, Europe is expressing its burning desire to at last get rid of the six million dead. Europe will not forgive the Jews the burden of Auschwitz.

That was just a load of crap, same goes for the rest of the article.

[little icebear]

If one act of selfdefense leaves way more civilians dead, than several years of the Palestinians, shooting rockets at Israel, one must not wonder that the perception wont be unanimously positive.

[NSX-R]

My reason:

Israel is considered a Western country, and as such is held to a higher standard than some of the fundamentalist countries that surround it. Being the wealthy, civilized people that they are, Israelis are not supposed to attack the weaker underdogs that are the Palestinians. Some people just have the natural tendency to sympathize with the underdogs even though that assumption is not always correct. Europeans won't hesitate to criticize Israel for its ongoing war, but they often forget that more violent conflicts are brewing in Sudan and Sri Lanka. Maybe they subconsciously believe that third world nations are run by backwards people, and that their propensity to violence is a result of their backwardness. Of course they're going to massacre thousands of innocent civilians! They're so poor and undeveloped! So instead of targeting the poor Palestinians they blame the advanced Israelis because they're supposed to know better.

Just my opinion.

[budgie]

My reason:

Israel is considered a Western country, and as such is held to a higher standard than some of the fundamentalist countries that surround it. Being the wealthy, civilized people that they are, Israelis are not supposed to attack the weaker underdogs that are the Palestinians. Some people just have the natural tendency to sympathize with the underdogs even though that assumption is not always correct. Europeans won't hesitate to criticize Israel for its ongoing war, but they often forget that more violent conflicts are brewing in Sudan and Sri Lanka. Maybe they subconsciously believe that third world nations are run by backwards people, and that their propensity to violence is a result of their backwardness. Of course they're going to massacre thousands of innocent civilians! They're so poor and undeveloped! So instead of targeting the poor Palestinians they blame the advanced Israelis because they're supposed to know better.

Just my opinion.

This is similar to what I've been saying for years. Europe complains about Israel because the hope Israel, a nation they believe has similar values to their own, will actually listen to reason. There's often not much they can do about Sudan, Congo and Sri lanka (of all places).

Another reason for continued international interest is the Palestine conflict is closer to home (they didn't tolerate a Balkan war for 50 years before stepping in did they?) and the location and players cause havoc on a global scale. Regional flare ups like Sri Lanka (again a poor example) and Congo don't have the same effect.

[sinophile]

Once again the pro-Israel crowd fails to see the problem objectively. Europe condemns Israel's heavy-handedness therefore they must be against the Jews.

Attention and sympathy are close companions.

The PLO and its factions understood this and used European cafes, airplanes and schools to earn the attention of the world. Its not enough to suffer, to be victimized or nearly wiped out. You must force the world to identify with your suffering, and to do that you have to get them to pay attention.

For that it helps to have a lot of money from state sponsors. Having your own television station helps as well.

So, budgie, I suggest that you are a victim yourself. Like many you have been manipulated to believe in a "heavy-handedness" that does not exist relative to similar situations throughout the world. They have your attention and you willingly give it to them.

Baaaaaaaa.... You are a sheep. :bash:

[budgie]

Yes let's resort to calling each other names when we fail to agree with their positions. Don't be so childish.

"relative to other situations in the world" doesn't factor in as far as I'm concerned. heavy-handedness is heavy handedness. Aned before anyone assumes I am anti Israel (or pro-Hamas as some of the more immature posters here will no doubt equate) here's my position.

1) Israel as a state has a right to exist.

2) So does a Palestinian state.

a) Israel needs to give up some land - the West Bank, Gaza and possibly Arab East Jerusalem.

b) The Palestinians need to give up terrorism.

c) Continued occupation and encirclement of Gaza needs to stop, as well as settlements on the West Bank. These things only strengthen organizations like Hamas.

Now before anyone calls me a dreamer this is only my position - largely in line with the world community, various US administrations (in principle even the Bush admin) and the UN. I don't actually believe achieving any of this will be quick or easy. Nor will it be the end to all troubles in the region but it's a start and it has to come about eventually if there is to be any peace at all.

Notice how I numbered the points too. a,b and c are all conditions that need to be met for 1 and 2 to occur. 1 and 2 are essential. there has to be a two-state solution. A lot of guys here don't like that. they'd like to see the Idea of palestine wiped out. But unless you wipe out the entire Palestinian people as well, there's no other road toward peace.

[seraosha]

This is similar to what I've been saying for years. Europe complains about Israel because the hope Israel, a nation they believe has similar values to their own, will actually listen to reason. There's often not much they can do about Sudan, Congo and Sri lanka (of all places).

Another reason for continued international interest is the Palestine conflict is closer to home (they didn't tolerate a Balkan war for 50 years before stepping in did they?) and the location and players cause havoc on a global scale. Regional flare ups like Sri Lanka (again a poor example) and Congo don't have the same effect.

This is known as "not in my backyard, don't care". Bravo Budgie, Bra-frickin-vo. And the only reason Europe cares now is because of the legions of "4th generation refugees" agitating on their streets, not because they feel kinship with either party.

Europe showed it's true colors regarding Jews during WWII, and that's not a lesson Israel is going to forget anytime soon.

[budgie]

This is known as "not in my backyard, don't care". Bravo Budgie, Bra-frickin-vo. And the only reason Europe cares now is because of the legions of "4th generation refugees" agitating on their streets, not because they feel kinship with either party.

Sad but true and every country is guilty of that mentality from time to time. But this only confirms what I said - the Palestinian conflict brings it closer to home for Europe - and for the US too - in the form of demonstrations, terror attacks and lobbying by either side.

Back to the OP that is more likely the cause of Europe's interest in Palestine than anti-semitism. It also explains why there is often less interest in sub-Saharan Africa.

I dunno what the hostility is for mate.

[Ali Baba]

This Article is Complete BS. There's no one reason behind the Whole Palestine-Israel Gagglefudge. Its all a Serious of different events, different actions, different moments, and ****ty Luck. That is one way of describing the Whole issue. A Serious of Awkward, unrelated Events, Fueled by Ignorance, and Human Greed. None's To Blame, Everyone's to Blame.


I Bet you Somewhere in History, all this Started By 2 Best friends, that found a Beautiful Women, and started fighting for her.

In All Seriousness though, what was Done is Done, People seem to forget that the past is past. Hell were supposed to be learning from it, not to repeat it. Instead were using the past as fuel for all this. And Sadly, if it wasn't the Whole Palestinian Israel Issue, it would be 2 other parties. Because Were Human. And a lot of things in this world we live in, runs on the hate and anguish of others.

[alexz]

And they acquired a generous portion of the wealth of the host country in the process.
This is the crux of the problem, for the last 2,000 years.

For nearly 2,000 years, Jews in Europe where not even allowed into town to sell a chicken, and when they were allowed into town, their homes were set on fire in the pogroms, blood lables, inquastions, facism, communism and every other broght idea to come out of Europe.

[coolieno99]

The Jews live and prospered in Germany for 400 years. And Germany was the first European country to allowed Jews to become naturalized citizens. All in all, Germany was very generous to the Jews. Can't put all the blames on the Germans for the Holocaust. Either blame no one, or share the blame, 50/50.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

The reason people are so upset over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that its whitey killing colored people, same with the Rhodesian war, or the South African border war, Iraq war etc. However, when blacks starts killing blacks nobody cares, just look at Rwanda, Sudan/Darfur, Congo, Sri Lanka etcSomehow I don't see Israeli's as exclusively European and the people of the Strip or the West Bank as coloured.
I have always viewed both parties the same people separated by faith and culture.

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

For nearly 2,000 years, Jews in Europe where not even allowed into town to sell a chickenProbably because the Jews were the Pikeys of that era.p-)

[Snoshi]

All in all, Germany was very generous to the Jews. Can't put all the blames on the Germans for the Holocaust. Either blame no one, or share the blame, 50/50.

Ummm.. What?

Care to explain more on this?

[Moledet]

Probably because the Jews were the Pikeys of that era.p-)
They were because they weren't allowed to buy land. Only later they were allowed to rant land for agriculture.

[MaverickCowboy]

They were because they weren't allowed to buy land. Only later they were allowed to rant land for agriculture.

Arnt Jews supposedly owners of the world?
as in own *everything* now though?
Things suck, i desire new management!

Joke. don't kill me please.

[MaverickCowboy]

Ummm.. What?

Care to explain more on this?

X2, What the Fvck?

[Soldat_Américain]

Very interesting read until it got to this:

The answer is that Palestinians have an enemy which is Europe’s obsession: the Jew... I was hoping for a more legitimate answer.


The Jews live and prospered in Germany for 400 years. And Germany was the first European country to allowed Jews to become naturalized citizens. All in all, Germany was very generous to the Jews. Can't put all the blames on the Germans for the Holocaust. Either blame no one, or share the blame, 50/50.

Care to explain how retarded you appear to be?

Someone un-ban him so I can fully understand his stupidity. Because I think he has some explaining to do.

[MaverickCowboy]

Very interesting read until it got to this:


I was hoping for a more legitimate answer.

Why do they hate Jews?

Could never understand it.

[Moledet]

Why do they hate Jews?

Could never understand it.
In the new era (meaning, not religious hate over killing Jesus/blood libels) because there were few that were moneylenders and con artists and some others that were ruthless businessmen and politicians (mostly the annoying type that tells you slavery is wrong, give equal rights for minorities, etc...).

[Eye]

For nearly 2,000 years, Jews in Europe where not even allowed into town to sell a chicken, and when they were allowed into town, their homes were set on fire in the pogroms, blood lables, inquastions, facism, communism and every other broght idea to come out of Europe.
I suppose it was because of lack of assimilation.
And I don't think Jews were persecuted in communism. Lenin, Trocky and many others were Jews AFAIK.

[Hollis]

Someone un-ban him so I can fully understand his stupidity. Because I think he has some explaining to do.


I would suggest that you stay in your own lane. Racism is not tolerated on this forum. They will only drag the forum down to their level.

[gustav]

I suppose it was because of lack of assimilation.
And I don't think Jews were persecuted in communism. Lenin, Trocky and many others were Jews AFAIK.

There were pogroms in Poland after WWII and Stalin was no friend of the Jews. (doctors plot)

[Flamming_Python]

There has been more BS spread about the Jews than about any other people on the face of the Earth. The problem with the Jews is that people talk about them far too much.

Personally I quite agree with Lenin's views on anti-Semitism, and I find that it quite adequately explains modern anti-Semitism and its causes as well, including among the oppressed Arab and Palestinian peoples:

http://www.youtube.com/v/EJ1jlbS0bTg&hl=en&fs=1


There were pogroms in Poland after WWII and Stalin was no friend of the Jews. (doctors plot)

Stalin was an enemy of Zionism. He spoke out quite strongly against anti-Semitism, and even created a Jewish republic/homeland in the USSR.


I suppose it was because of lack of assimilation.
And I don't think Jews were persecuted in communism. Lenin, Trocky and many others were Jews AFAIK.

Lenin was not a Jew, he was 1/4 or so Jewish but not I believe through his maternal line. I myself am 1/2 Jewish, but i'm not a Jew.

[Climber]

I suppose it was because of lack of assimilation.
And I don't think Jews were persecuted in communism. Lenin, Trocky and many others were Jews AFAIK.

Lenin wasn't Jewish. Trotsky was, actually my family is related to him.

Jews weren't persecuted as a national identity but were persecuted as a religion.

[Flamming_Python]

Lenin wasn't Jewish. Trotsky was, actually my family is related to him.

Jews weren't persecuted as a national identity but were persecuted as a religion.

You mean in the USSR? All religions were persecuted, atheism was the order of the day.

[Climber]

You mean in the USSR? All religions were persecuted, atheism was the order of the day.

Yes I mean in the USSR, Eye was referring to Lenin and Trotsky.

[domokun]

Thread about nonsense.... and lot of newly we.. ehh.. banned folks making idiotic statements.

History of Europe's quite new friendship with arabs is bit tricky issue. Europeans were quite pro Israel until 1967 and 1973.... what happened then is quite simple, arabs found out about using oil price as negotiating tool. That made difference in European political behavior. Since that but lot after it Arab immigration has added it's part in European political correctness. If Europe would be more independent in energy matters and economically less dependent on middle eastern dictatorships and pseudo democracies, no one would give a sh!t about Palestinians. When European nations stopped supporting Israel with military tech sales? Six Day war was when French and UK stopped supplying Israel with weapons openly, USA became most important after French and UK folded under pressure from oil producers. US simply stepped in to continue on gaining intel over Soviet gear from Israel, before that they got second hand from Europeans, post 1967 order in that just changed. Supporting areas only real democracy has lot less morally high reason than just supporting democratic ideals.

Arab states value palestinians lot under economic deals now, they are willing to "fight" Israel only until last palestinian. Rest is largely just diplomatic jargon to applease more barbaric currents in their own population and to keep them occupied from demanding democracy for themselves. Moment west becomes not dependant on oil arab countries become politically unimportant to west as long as they don't have nuclear weapons, they don't give rest of world anything besides oil.

[RoyB]

Didn't even bothered reading the article, just read the stupid quotes that people took from it and it was enough for me to decide that its a BS article..

[LRPV]

Once again the pro-Israel crowd fails to see the problem objectively. Europe condemns Israel's heavy-handedness therefore they must be against the Jews. Bravo. Anything short of recognizing Israel's indisputable right to govern all of the promised land and expell every last Palestinian must be anti-semitism right?

It can't be that simple. Both peoples have to live there and this is something the extremists on both sides (and on the other side of the atlantic) need to grasp. The Palestinians must have their own state too eventually. This is not a matter of personal preference or biblical prophecy or favoring one side over the other. A two-state solution is the only possible end to this chaos.

Apart from that, it is an age-old conflict that threatens and destabilizes the whole region and by extent the rest of the world. The Palestine problem fuels worldwide terror and jeopardizes energy supplies, and that's why it gets more attention than Congo. Not because Europeans are feeling uneasy about the Jews.

Nice post. Israels heavy-handedness...that's objective. Would your country suffer years of terror attacks before launching a limited incursion in response? ???

The two State solution already exists. Britain granted Trans-Jordan, now Jordan to the Arabs from the Mandate territory that was to be divided between Arabs and Jews. Take a look at an atlas and tell me the Jews got a fair deal.

Your last paragraph leaves me speechless.

[LRPV]

Didn't even bothered reading the article, just read the stupid quotes that people took from it and it was enough for me to decide that its a BS article..


Why do people insist on posting a comment on an article they proudly admit they never read?????:cantbeli:

[Atlantic Friend]

So the whole point of the article is saying "No fair ! The world look the other way as well when it's us doing the violence" ?

If I sum up the article, it comes off as "European news and public opinion is focused on Israel's actions in occupied territories because of a) closet antisemitism b) anger derived from a) and from guilt about the Holocaust, and c) because they can't forgive Jews for not having been killed to the last man during said Holocaust". And also : "criticizing Israel is akin to antimsemitism as proven by a recent poll".

How does the author explain the greater emphasis given by US media to what happens in Israel and the territories it occupies, compared to what happens in Sri Lanka, then ? Is America too a closet antisemitic nation plagued by mixed feelings of rage and guilt because of Auschwitz ? I don't know if Japanese media give more attention to Israel's action than to Sri Lanka's, but if it does, will it be explained as yet another case of a), b) and c) ?

I also love the reminder about the Palestinian vote. I'm sure that every Palestinian political party wanting to advocate peace and cooperation with Israel was welcome to do so, and that Palestinians were thoroughly encouraged to freely express their opinions. That's probably why the Hamas machine-gunned the Fath cadre, set fire to their buildings, and killed some of their militants. Let's be fair, the Fath used to do the same. So yes, Palestinians voted very freely, and since they voted for bad people, they are bad people as a whole, unworthy of the world's attention.

But well, what will ever change ? Israeli citizens will say it's not fair Arab terrorists kill their children, Palestinian refugees will say it's not fair Israel bomb their neighborhood, international media will say it's not fair there's so much violence in the Holy Land, and articles from every party to the conflict will say it's not fair the world can't look the other way as it does when it happens in more distant lands. And let's face it, none of it is fair indeed.

[Hollis]

AF, I think I would sum it up in a more simple way, It is a cluster "F". Too many people from too many countries has some kind of strong self interest in the affairs of that region. I would not be surprise of the mixes of reasons, "all the above", might just be valid.

Obviously no one reason can explain it all. Saying that, no several reasons can explain it all too. It is one hot global political football.

[Parisien]

I totaly agree on the fact that the focus is linked to Israel being an occidental country, but I would also like to make an other comment:


What other qualities do Palestinian victims have that prompts Europe’s media to focus so much attention on them? Nowhere in Europe have demonstrators protested against the Arab terrorists who try to undermine Iraq’s burgeoning democratic process, even though the number of Iraqi victims of terrorist violence is many times greater than the number of victims in Gaza

The article rely on protestations in the streets and reports in the media to declare that we hate israel and love palestinian. But using the same indicators, in France, he would also find that we hate Sarkozy, that we hate the US, that we hate Catholicism...

A poll during the israeli operation gave the following results:

Who is to be blamed for the conflict opposing israel and Hamas in Gaza?

Israeli government: 18%
Hamas: 23%
Both:28%
No opinion: 31%

[Dr_Fünke]

The two State solution already exists. Britain granted Trans-Jordan, now Jordan to the Arabs from the Mandate territory that was to be divided between Arabs and Jews. Take a look at an atlas and tell me the Jews got a fair deal.

considering they've ended up with 70% of 'Palestine' when they legally owned less than one tenth,while being equipped with plenty of military goodies free of charge, I'd say any claim that the Jews are getting a raw deal is preposterous.

[Climber]

considering they've ended up with 70% of 'Palestine' when they legally owned less than one tenth,while being equipped with plenty of military goodies free of charge, I'd say any claim that the Jews are getting a raw deal is preposterous.


Care to explain that? I think you don't know your facts.

[Atlantic Friend]

AF, I think I would sum it up in a more simple way, It is a cluster "F".

Yup. I just felt wordy today.

[JJC]

considering they've ended up with 70% of 'Palestine' when they legally owned less than one tenth,while being equipped with plenty of military goodies free of charge, I'd say any claim that the Jews are getting a raw deal is preposterous.

Which country was equipping Israel with military goodies for free? As far as I remember, the British Mandate controlled region, made Jewish immigration to Palestine illegal at a certain point and made import of weapons to the Jews illegal. There were underground operations to smuggle weapons and make bullets out of lipstick in make shift bullet "factories," now that doesn't sound like they were getting tons of freebies.

[Hollis]

considering they've ended up with 70% of 'Palestine' when they legally owned less than one tenth,while being equipped with plenty of military goodies free of charge, I'd say any claim that the Jews are getting a raw deal is preposterous.


Care to explain that? I think you don't know your facts.


I would also like to see your response.

I also noticed your comments in another thread.

[sinophile]

considering they've ended up with 70% of 'Palestine' when they legally owned less than one tenth,while being equipped with plenty of military goodies free of charge, I'd say any claim that the Jews are getting a raw deal is preposterous.

Just curious... how far back are proponents of Jewish statehood allowed to go back in asserting their property rights? Is the British Mandate the cut-off period, or can the dead sea scrolls be brought into evidence your honor?

[LRPV]

considering they've ended up with 70% of 'Palestine' when they legally owned less than one tenth,while being equipped with plenty of military goodies free of charge, I'd say any claim that the Jews are getting a raw deal is preposterous.

Given your political predisposition your view is no surprise. You 70% figure requires support. 70% of what? Are you intentionally neglecting the Mandate obligations that were denied the Jews? Ever read why Britain gave Trans-Jordan independance before the partition?

The historical facts are there for objective discussion. Political passion is a reality, but pursuit of this topic is futile if only select facts are cited.

[LRPV]

Just curious... how far back are proponents of Jewish statehood allowed to go back in asserting their property rights? Is the British Mandate the cut-off period, or can the dead sea scrolls be brought into evidence your honor?

Despite the tone of your question I'll give a personal answer...

In broad-brush, there has been a Jewish presence here for 3000 years. Maybe longer depending on your source. I am referring to published archaeology.

For contemporary political discussion I use the Mandate period as a base-line. This is because after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire there was an entire region devoid of nation-State status.

From here there is abundant material for pro-Jewish or pro-Arab debate.

[1curious]

Just caught up with this fascinating thread. Few random thoughts on THE PROBLEM:

1/ The article is crap.
2/ Part of the GRAND misunderstanding is that most observers confuse 2 intertwined yet separate things: Jews and Israelis.
3/ Israeli-Palestinian problem would have been solved long ago if the wider ME prosperity was more even.
4/ Explaining: existence of prevalent Arabic middle class (40-50% like in Europe) would have created a wider political class with moderate and pragmatic leadership ready for a rational compromise with likely minded Israel.
5/ Such is nature of all peoples: we care less about nationalism and wars when our lifestyles are consumed by more pleasant things. We become progressively more vulnerable, insecure, overactive when prosperity fades away.
6/ Israel, to a large extent, is not at fault for the realities (or mistakes if you will) of History. The turn of historic events created Israel. The rest was/is the struggle for survival while surrounded by radically incompatible states.
7/ Ironically, many mistakes committed by the Israelis, are lessons-not-learned from Jewish own history.
8/ Cold war and the grand confrontation between the US and FSU delayed ME’s resurgence. We have the opportunity now.
9/ The very special and real power of the US Jewish lobby (don’t get me wrong: it's very much needed for the survival of the only democratic state in the ME), IMO, had created a situation where the US, the only super-state with huge influence in both camps, had become ineffective. We could have contributed to the fair, long-term ME solution, had we been perceived as more even-handed
10/ Finally, Jews are like everyone else. Except they do have truly unique history and influence on other tenets of our lives.

That's NOT all but perhaps enough for now.

[Paya]

Europe has been unkind, to say the least, to Jews throughout their history on the continent, that much is true. Mass expulsions, massacres, institutionalized discrimination, pogroms, all leading up to the Holocaust. While there were the so-called Righteous among the Nations, there was a lot of people who willingly reported their Jew neighbors to the Nazi occupation powers.

However, the present-day average European simply fails to understand antisemitism. It is as distant to him as the witch-hunts or the Inquisition. To say EU policies concerning Israel is guided by some kind of deep-rooted hatred toward the Jews is absurd.

[Octavariable]

To say EU policies concerning Israel is guided by some kind of deep-rooted hatred toward the Jews is absurd.

does this include differentiating between "Israel" and "Jews"? because behind the EU heads are peoples that might not necesseraly realize that there is.

[Paya]

does this include differentiating between "Israel" and "Jews"? because behind the EU heads are peoples that might not necesseraly realize that there is.
As much as they differentiate between any country and it's population.

EDIT: Or rather "founding nation".

[Climber]

does this include differentiating between "Israel" and "Jews"? because behind the EU heads are peoples that might not necesseraly realize that there is.

Some European youngsters thinks that all Jews come from Israel as other emigrants in Europe. It happened to me this February in Spain.

[matthew.manhorn]

You know, I've got a question to Germans. Are Germans (excluding the Turkish/Muslim minorities) allowed to have Anti-Israeli/Pro-Palestinian protests?

About the good ol' Palestinian-Israeli issue: The Palestinians waged the 1948 war without recognizing their own state by the UN. They gave up their plan B and lost the gamble, it's that simple.

[alexz]

I suppose it was because of lack of assimilation.
And I don't think Jews were persecuted in communism. Lenin, Trocky and many others were Jews AFAIK.

The lack of assimilation was because they were not allowed to assimilate.
I don't even think you realize that you are pouring salt on open wounds.
Jews were not allowed to join trade guild or the army and were physically expelled from Britain and Spain. There was the inquisition, pogroms in the Jewish enclaves, since they were not allowed to live near Christians.
The restrictions were lifted when the Europeans needed canon fodder for their wars, and even the it resulted with the Draifus case, which ultimately lead to the creation of Israel.

Lenin was Jewish?

[matthew.manhorn]

Lenin was part Russian, Jewish and Tartar

Religious jews were def. persecuted by communists (just like other religions). most communist jews were secular jews since they're the most oppressed ethnic groups in Europe and wanted change during the communist revolution

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

The lack of assimilation was because they were not allowed to assimilate.
I don't even think you realize that you are pouring salt on open wounds.
Jews were not allowed to join trade guild or the army and were physically expelled from Britain and Spain. There was the inquisition, pogroms in the Jewish enclaves, since they were not allowed to live near Christians.
The restrictions were lifted when the Europeans needed canon fodder for their wars, and even the it resulted with the Draifus case, which ultimately lead to the creation of Israel.

Lenin was Jewish?Did Jewish folk want to assimilate? And I think you will find very few of the merchant class were hauled of to fight against their will. Its true the Catholic Church was very cruel to the Jews and pretty much tried to oppress all others who spoke their liberal thoughts. Jews throughout the ages always had a more finely tuned sense of justice than the host maybe this what brought many of them to the socialist cause in Imperial Russia.

[gustav]

The restrictions were lifted when the Europeans needed canon fodder for their wars, and even the it resulted with the Draifus case, which ultimately lead to the creation of Israel.

In France Jews were emancipated and given equal rights as soon as 1791.

And the Dreyfus affair was a scandal that ultimately led to the defeat of the antisemitic camp, elsewhere in Europe no one would have made such fuss for a Jew.

[alexz]

Did Jewish folk want to assimilate? And I think you will find very few of the merchant class were hauled of to fight against their will. Its true the Catholic Church was very cruel to the Jews and pretty much tried to oppress all others who spoke their liberal thoughts. Jews throughout the ages always had a more finely tuned sense of justice than the host maybe this what brought many of them to the socialist cause in Imperial Russia.

Once given the oppertunity to assimilate in the eaely 19th century, Jewish philosphers, artist, scientists and traders became the leaders in the fields within a very short time.
So the answer is yes, they did.

[alexz]

In France Jews were emancipated and given equal rights as soon as 1791.

And the Dreyfus affair was a scandal that ultimately led to the defeat of the antisemitic camp, elsewhere in Europe no one would have made such fuss for a Jew.

That's true, I'm reffering to the previous 1700 years.
Dreyfus was still imprisoned for a decade before being released. It was the fact that it happened when Jews were enjoying the greatest freedom they ever had in Europe, that gave birth to the Zionist movment.

[Izmirlian]

broadly looking at the history of Europe, Jews, and Arabs and muslims, you CAN in fact say that Jews have historically more in common with Arabs than Europeans. Of course many Jews have assimilated now into many anglo-european countries, but based on what Alexz says, that's only because they were finally allowed to assimilate. and it makes a lot of sense. European societies abused them systematically for most if not all of their history culminating with the creation of Israel.

Isn't it true that Jews and Palestinians lived in relative peace for centuries?
If so, then the situation that Israel is in today is even more tragic, in the sense that Israel has so many more enemies, perhaps unnecessary enemies.

I never realized just what it means to be a historical Israeli Jew in today's world. I still don't get fully obviously, but it's pretty tragic and sad considering what incredible contributions they make to everything

[Hollis]

Isn't it true that Jews and Palestinians lived in relative peace for centuries?



Jews who lived in the area Palestine, were also Palestinians. You might want to research where the name Palestine came from.

[Izmirlian]

Jews who lived in the area Palestine, were also Palestinians. You might want to research where the name Palestine came from.

I knew that actually. but thanks for pointing it out.

[alexz]

broadly looking at the history of Europe, Jews, and Arabs and muslims, you CAN in fact say that Jews have historically more in common with Arabs than Europeans. Of course many Jews have assimilated now into many anglo-european countries, but based on what Alexz says, that's only because they were finally allowed to assimilate. and it makes a lot of sense. European societies abused them systematically for most if not all of their history culminating with the creation of Israel.

Isn't it true that Jews and Palestinians lived in relative peace for centuries?
If so, then the situation that Israel is in today is even more tragic, in the sense that Israel has so many more enemies, perhaps unnecessary enemies.

I never realized just what it means to be a historical Israeli Jew in today's world. I still don't get fully obviously, but it's pretty tragic and sad considering what incredible contributions they make to everything

Until the 19th century the number of Jews in what is now Israel was a few thousands with similar or slightly greater numbers of Arabs. Since the Turks rulled the area there wasn't much room for nationalistic causes and we all know how the empire dealt with that.

[Izmirlian]

Until the 19th century the number of Jews in what is now Israel was a few thousands with similar or slightly greater numbers of Arabs. Since the Turks rulled the area there wasn't much room for nationalistic causes and we all know how the empire dealt with that.

a few thousands not much... So is it even relevant in your opinion that they use to live peacefully side by side?

[Ordie]

Why The Palestinians? And Why The Jews?

Because it sells more newspapers.

Besides, people have been desensitized on news of violence and famine in Africa.

[Moledet]

a few thousands not much... So is it even relevant in your opinion that they use to live peacefully side by side?
No, they didn't live very peacefully.
In the beginning they were Arab gangs that used to steal crops and agriculture equipment, after that the Jewish farmers created an armed guards unit and there was less looting but then in 1920, 1921, 1929,1933 and 1938 there were pogroms against the Jewish settlers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Riots_in_Israel_and_Palestine

[Mr Gently Benevolent]

Once given the oppertunity to assimilate in the eaely 19th century, Jewish philosphers, artist, scientists and traders became the leaders in the fields within a very short time.
So the answer is yes, they did.The early 19th century was a period of great social upheaval, all of the under classes had doors opened for them that had been barred for centuries.

[RoyB]

Isn't it true that Jews and Palestinians lived in relative peace for centuries?
Modern day Palestinians didn't even existed til the late years of the past century..
Look it up, as said by Hollis.

[Zeev]

Jews who lived in the area Palestine, were also Palestinians. You might want to research where the name Palestine came from.

greeks huh?

I do see a lot of greek in ppl that we call today "palestinians", indeed p-)

[budgie]

Modern day Palestinians didn't even existed til the late years of the past century..
Look it up, as said by Hollis.

No matter what name you call them by they've been there for centuries. Duuh.

[Hollis]

No matter what name you call them by they've been there for centuries. Duuh.



Like DUH,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Do you see Israelis as Palestinians? Or is it just a exclusive name for others. Prior 1948, everyone who was born there, lived there where Palestinians. Also do you see the make up of all Israelis as Jews? Do you realize there are others? That Bedouin and Druse serve in the IDF and they are not Jews?

Do you realize that Arafat called Trans Jordan Palestine? The modern day Palestinian came into being after 1948, some will say in 1967, After the PLO was kicked out of Jordan (see Black September) and then after getting kicked out of Lebanon.

Also do you know where the name Palestine came from and what name it replaced?

[Vorian]

What I find rather ironic is the fact that while most people in this forum mock the people from Balkans for "killing each other for centuries old stories" they find nothing odd whatsoever in Isralelis claiming the land belongs to them cause they were there two millenia ago.
It belongs to both. Palestinians have to understand that Jews are there to stay and the Jews have to understand that "being there first" does not give them any more rights than the Palestinians have.


And for God's shake what's the origin of the name Palestine got to do anything with the current problems??

[Moledet]

The land is ours because we made it what it is and bought it with blood. If we leave there will be nothing here apart of war because there's nothing, the only natural reserve here is brain.

He's just trying to show that there's no such thing as Palestinians, they are Arabs, clear and simple.

[Ordie]

the only natural reserve here is brain.
Without food, water and oxygen the brain is useless.

[RoyB]

The Arabs had their change in 48', they blew it.
We built this country in just a few decades of wars and hard work, and look at it now.
Before there was nothing here but sand dunes and tribes.. the difference is that we developed into a functioning society, and they remained the same as they were 60+ years ago.

[RoyB]

Without food, water and oxygen the brain is useless.
And the Palestinians has all 3 of those.. what are you trying to say?

[Hollis]

And for God's shake what's the origin of the name Palestine got to do anything with the current problems??


And how do think Arafat became a multi-billionaire, if names don't have anything with the current problems.

I tend to think those who say they support Palestinians actually support their slaughter and suffering. The more the Palestinians suffer the more money is pumped in to the PA, Hamas, Fatah, etc, etc........ the terrorists just get richer.

[Moledet]

Without food, water and oxygen the brain is useless.
We know, that's the reason while building universities we built a pipes system that delivers water all over the land, dried the swamps to create agriculture and turned the dry land of the coastal and desert area fertile and planted trees to keep the air clean.

People think that we got here and everything was excellent, it wasn't even close. There were few places that were ok and the Arabs placed their villages there. Everything else was rubbish, including Jerusalem that was just a poor peoples neighborhood before the Jewish settlers built the modern city. For a decade the people were given food rations from the government, lived in tiny apartments built by the government or in tents/caravans cities, water was supplied by army trucks, even clothes and furniture were built and supplied by the government. This country wasn't born with a silver spoon, it took a lot of hard work and the Arabs rarely contributed.

[Ordie]

This country wasn't born with a silver spoon, it took a lot of hard work and the Arabs rarely contributed.

If it were not for Palestinian workers, Tel Aviv would not have skyscrapers.

[sinophile]

If it were not for Palestinian workers, Tel Aviv would not have skyscrapers.

And if not for Fatah, Hamas and Hezbollah so would the Palestinians in Gaza.

[alexz]

If it were not for Palestinian workers, Tel Aviv would not have skyscrapers.

Actualy they were replaced with Romanian, Thai and Chinese workers a while back.

[budgie]

The Arabs had their change in 48', they blew it.
We built this country in just a few decades of wars and hard work, and look at it now.
Before there was nothing here but sand dunes and tribes.. the difference is that we developed into a functioning society, and they remained the same as they were 60+ years ago.


No they are refugees. Not merely tribes. They only wish they could have things as they were 60 years ago, but they can't.

And nor do I accept that they 'blew' their chance in 1948. yes they lost the war but they haven't given up and they are still there. We should be past the stage now as a race where the divine right of conquest decides who gets to keep what. Sooner or later a compromise must be reached and a Palestinian nation must be established somewhere. Till then violence from either side will not end the problem. I say again till then it will not end. Good luck to you.

And for those who say there's no such thing as a Palestinian this is not a matter of a perception. They will not disappear just because you refuse to acknowlegde them.

I've met doezens of Palestinians, worked with them, roomed with one for a time in Dubai. saying they're all just Arabs is a slap in the face. There are Moroccans, Algerians, Iraqis and Syrians: they see the difference if if you don't and if they see it it is real. It's as stupid as referring to all white people as European or all blacks as African. There are ethnic and cultural differences within.

[Snoshi]

No they are refugees. Not merely tribes. They only wish they could have things as they were 60 years ago, but they can't.

Refugees? Only according to special laws.. How can a child of some Palestinians be a refugee when he have never ever been in Israel or Palestinian area?

[budgie]

Refugees? Only according to special laws.. How can a child of some Palestinians be a refugee when he have never ever been in Israel or Palestinian area?

Some expelled Palestinians are still refugees. You think they're all dead. or perhaps israel is hoping they'll all die off one day just so their children can't claimed to have ever lived there?

There's no need trying to split hairs or argue for the sake of it. The Palestinians want to have a state. It's a dream passed down from generation to generation. And as long as the two parties cannot agree on what form that will take there will be conflict.

[Ordie]

Actualy they were replaced with Romanian, Thai and Chinese workers a while back.

Who are non-Jews who have settled in a Jewish state with Israeli kids who are exempt from military service.

[Climber]

No they are refugees. Not merely tribes. They only wish they could have things as they were 60 years ago, but they can't.

And nor do I accept that they 'blew' their chance in 1948. yes they lost the war but they haven't given up and they are still there. We should be past the stage now as a race where the divine right of conquest decides who gets to keep what. Sooner or later a compromise must be reached and a Palestinian nation must be established somewhere. Till then violence from either side will not end the problem. I say again till then it will not end. Good luck to you.

And for those who say there's no such thing as a Palestinian this is not a matter of a perception. They will not disappear just because you refuse to acknowlegde them.

I've met doezens of Palestinians, worked with them, roomed with one for a time in Dubai. saying they're all just Arabs is a slap in the face. There are Moroccans, Algerians, Iraqis and Syrians: they see the difference if if you don't and if they see it it is real. It's as stupid as referring to all white people as European or all blacks as African. There are ethnic and cultural differences within.

Well, nationality is an European classification. The Arab countries were made into what they are after the Ottoman defeat.

The borders are as artificial and problematic as the African ones.

Just a product of the colonial era.

When people use that argument against us, they fail to see the reality of the world in which they live, more when one is judged by double standards of morality from places that messed up with humanity for hundreds of years.

I hope for a solution, I don't want my son to fight, I want my son to work the kutna ( cotton) fields in the negev ( or be a rock star, a MD, or whatever) without fear of violence.

[Moledet]

Who are non-Jews who have settled in a Jewish state with Israeli kids who are exempt from military service.
They haven't settled unless they married Israelis and to marry Israelis they need to convert. They aren't exempt and do serve.

budgie, they aren't going to die off but eventually Jordan will fall to their hands (they already makeup 70% of Jordan) and become Palestine. All you need is some patience and things will fall into order like they should have.

[Dr_Fünke]

Which country was equipping Israel with military goodies for free? As far as I remember, the British Mandate controlled region, made Jewish immigration to Palestine illegal at a certain point and made import of weapons to the Jews illegal. There were underground operations to smuggle weapons and make bullets out of lipstick in make shift bullet "factories," now that doesn't sound like they were getting tons of freebies.

I wasn't referring to weapons procurement at the time of Israel's foundation.

[RoyB]

No they are refugees. Not merely tribes. They only wish they could have things as they were 60 years ago, but they can't.
The are very few 'true' refugees out there, if any.
The 'Palestinians' hasn't changed ever since 60 years ago, they are still undeveloped, still divided by different leaderships, still have tribes, hordes, hamulot, whatever you want to call it.
Still the same.

And nor do I accept that they 'blew' their chance in 1948. yes they lost the war but they haven't given up and they are still there.
Its not just that they lost the war, they started it.

We should be past the stage now as a race where the divine right of conquest decides who gets to keep what.
'The conquest', what do you mean by that?
The United fvcking Nations of the world decided who gets what, we agreed, they started a war. the same organization that they run now crying every time they make up a new thing against 'the occupation'.

Sooner or later a compromise must be reached and a Palestinian nation must be established somewhere. Till then violence from either side will not end the problem. I say again till then it will not end. Good luck to you.
There is already a Palestinian nation - Jordan.

I've met doezens of Palestinians, worked with them, roomed with one for a time in Dubai. saying they're all just Arabs is a slap in the face. There are Moroccans, Algerians, Iraqis and Syrians: they see the difference if if you don't and if they see it it is real. It's as stupid as referring to all white people as European or all blacks as African. There are ethnic and cultural differences within.
You said it, they are Moroccans, Algerians, Iraqis..
Technically, you can find a name to define them, but Arabs.

There's no need trying to split hairs or argue for the sake of it. The Palestinians want to have a state. It's a dream passed down from generation to generation. And as long as the two parties cannot agree on what form that will take there will be conflict.
Ironically enough, the 2 parties(or more) that needs to agree on what form are all Palestinians.

Who are non-Jews who have settled in a Jewish state with Israeli kids who are exempt from military service.
They are illegal if they just do that..
But if their kids are born in Israel, they are Israeli citizens, and are obligated to join the army.

[Dr_Fünke]

You 70% figure requires support. 70% of what?


70% of the land that Jews had no legal claim to (except for the fraction I've mentioned) and now includes in it's state.


what exactly does your claim of Jews getting a 'raw deal' in this conflict rest on? it's certainly quite a strange notion to think that the party who ends up with more land is somehow at a disadvantage

[RoyB]

Have you ever checked why Israel ended up with more land?^
Not because we wanted, but because we had to.

[Octavariable]

70% of the land that Jews had no legal claim to (except for the fraction I've mentioned) and now includes in it's state.


what exactly does your claim of Jews getting a 'raw deal' in this conflict rest on? it's certainly quite a strange notion to think that the party who ends up with more land is somehow at a disadvantage

Hey' there was this exact disscution a few threads back. the majority of the land given to the jews int the 47 partition plan was infact ununhabited at the time, including the negev desert, the swamps of the coastal plain, and malaria infested valleys in the north. all the rest of it, i.e, the populated parts, well, are already populated.

[uTu]

yeah I've always wondered this, especially around the time of Cast Lead. I guess it's easy to get away with Jew hate. It's been a European/Christian/Arab/Muslim etc tradition for so long it's easy for people fall into it without much thought?

[Dr_Fünke]

Its not just that they lost the war, they started it.


the arabs did not start that war by any stretch. the Jews were on the offensive outside of their partition before independence.

[gustav]

I guess it's easy to get away with Jew hate. It's been a European/Christian/Arab/Muslim etc tradition for so long it's for people fall into it without much thought?

I tend to think modern antisemitism came right from Europe. Its not to say that Jews were not persecuted, like Christians, in the ME before, but it was not as systematic and uniquely focused on them like it became in the nineteenth century.

Muslims were far more tolerant towards the Jews than Christians from the conquest of the Mediteranean basin to the beginning of the Enlightment.

[Moledet]

the arabs did not start that war by any stretch. the Jews were on the offensive outside of their partition before independence.
The day the partition plan was accepted by Israel the Arab gangs refused and the next day attacked Jews. The independence war began at November 29th 1947 when the Arab gangs attacked, continued on May 14th 1948 when the 5 Arab armies joined the Arab gangs and ended on July 20th 1949 when the ceasefire was signed with Syria.

[Dr_Fünke]

Have you ever checked why Israel ended up with more land?^
Not because we wanted, but because we had to.

not sure on what grounds you're suggesting annexation/expansion was a necessity

fighting prior to 48 and the 67 war a clear case of oppertunistic land grabbing

[Dr_Fünke]

The day the partition plan was accepted by Israel the Arab gangs refused and the next day attacked Jews. The independence war began at November 29th 1947 when the Arab gangs attacked, continued on May 14th 1948 when the 5 Arab armies joined the Arab gangs and ended on July 20th 1949 when the ceasefire was signed with Syria.

I don't know why you're confusing the civil war the indepedence war?

[Dr_Fünke]

The day the partition plan was accepted by Israel the Arab gangs refused and the next day attacked Jews. The independence war began at November 29th 1947 when the Arab gangs attacked, continued on May 14th 1948 when the 5 Arab armies joined the Arab gangs and ended on July 20th 1949 when the ceasefire was signed with Syria.

I don't know why you're confusing the civil war the indepedence war?

[Moledet]

I don't know why you're confusing the civil war the indepedence war?
I don't know what's so hard to understand in my explanation that you come up with questions.

[RoyB]

the arabs did not start that war by any stretch. the Jews were on the offensive outside of their partition before independence.
Right.
Because prior to 47'-48' we constantly attacked Arab villages, and committed slaughters.. oh wait, its the Arabs who did this to us!


not sure on what grounds you're suggesting annexation/expansion was a necessity

fighting prior to 48 and the 67 war a clear case of oppertunistic land grabbing
Sure.
Because all we want is land, and we are eager to start a war against numerous enemies in order to get swamps and sand dunes.


*Just a tip for you-
You are too biased that its blinding you, go take a history class and then comeback.

[Climber]

I wasn't referring to weapons procurement at the time of Israel's foundation.

So, you was referring to what then? because your post was referring at the time of the Israeli foundation.

Some other countries get "free" or got "free" weapons in the past and now.

i asked you before and I ask you again, do you care to explain your point?

[Climber]

the arabs did not start that war by any stretch. the Jews were on the offensive outside of their partition before independence.

Again, check your facts. you are wrong.

[Ordie]

They are illegal if they just do that..
But if their kids are born in Israel, they are Israeli citizens, and are obligated to join the army.

Therefore are Israeli Arabs should be obligated to serve in the IDF and become fighter pilots.

[RoyB]

Israeli Arabs are not obligated to serve in the army.
IMO every Israeli citizen should serve in the army.. although for some its not practical, not now at least.

[Climber]

Therefore are Israeli Arabs should be obligated to serve in the IDF and become fighter pilots.

They can volunteer, not many of them do it. You know, there is a conflict of interest. So they are dispensed from serving. They aren't the only ones who should be obliged IMO.

BTW Bedouins are Arab and they serve in the IDF.

[RoyB]

Bedouins are not obligated to serve in the army neither.

[Climber]

Bedouins are not obligated to serve in the army neither.

I know, that's the point. They volunteer and they are accepted.

[RoyB]

Druzes are a good example for that also, Charkesians etc.. at least most of them are loyal.

[Zeev]

fighting prior to 48 and the 67 war a clear case of oppertunistic land grabbing

The "part" that was attribuated to the jews in 47 cannot became a viable state, in any case.

Of course, now you could say the same about palestinians nowadays, but that's life, war is war and the stronger win, we deserve to live again in the land that gave birth to our people because we take it back with our blood. That was the price of victory, and no other nation in the world would have done this job for us.

[Vorian]

war is war and the stronger win, we deserve to live again in the land that gave birth to our people because we take it back with our blood.


This is 2009. Developed countries should not have that mindset.

[alexz]

Therefore are Israeli Arabs should be obligated to serve in the IDF and become fighter pilots.

Whats wrong with that?
http://www.metimes.com/International/2008/04/11/first_muslim_woman_joins_israeli_air_force/7528/

[Ordie]

In a democracy you cannot have double standards and discriminate against citizens from serving thier country on the basis of religion and ethnicity.

It's either everyone is drafted in the military regardless of background or become an all volunteer force with equal access for all.

[Octavariable]

In a democracy you cannot have double standards and discriminate against citizens from serving thier country on the basis of religion and ethnicity.


in Israel, there are double standards regarding even Israeli jews in terms of who gets drafted, how about that:roll:

[RoyB]

In a democracy you cannot have double standards and discriminate against citizens from serving thier country on the basis of religion and ethnicity.

It's either everyone is drafted in the military regardless of background or become an all volunteer force with equal access for all.
Yeah, well, Germany has a conscript army also, and not everyone are obligated to join.
I, for one, think that every Israeli citizen should be drafted to the military if he is fit.
But hey, its not like there are thousands of Arabs trying to knock down the door of the drafting office.

[HellToupee]

Hey' there was this exact disscution a few threads back. the majority of the land given to the jews int the 47 partition plan was infact ununhabited at the time, including the negev desert, the swamps of the coastal plain, and malaria infested valleys in the north. all the rest of it, i.e, the populated parts, well, are already populated.

But in all the land they got in the 47 plan jews only held a narrow majority of the population, if it was not for the war and resulting population flight they could have potentional became a minority in their own country.

[Moledet]

In a democracy you cannot have double standards and discriminate against citizens from serving thier country on the basis of religion and ethnicity.

It's either everyone is drafted in the military regardless of background or become an all volunteer force with equal access for all.
Right, that's great for the US but here the state doesn't allow but encourage groups to keep their traditions, language, etc... by funding and also by creating certain agreements that help them keep their culture and/or identity. You have a more conservative view that everyone should be similar and if they want than they can fund their own schools and so on, France has an even more conservative view that all citizens must be the same and they don't allow immigrants to keep their identity.
The IDF also tend not to force citizens to serve, if a Jewish citizen really don't want to serve than the IDF will prefer to let go because it can only damage the army drafting such a person.

[Climber]

In a democracy you cannot have double standards and discriminate against citizens from serving thier country on the basis of religion and ethnicity.

It's either everyone is drafted in the military regardless of background or become an all volunteer force with equal access for all.

What would you think if a soldier of your country is obligated to serve but then he refuse to fight? Forget about Israel, I am asking in your country.

[Ordie]

What would you think if a soldier of your country is obligated to serve but then he refuse to fight? Forget about Israel, I am asking in your country.

The United States is an all volunteer force.

[Player]

This is 2009. Developed countries should not have that mindset.

Israel is maybe a developed country, but the mindset of many people here is still far behind of the 21st century, the post you quoted is a good example of that.

[Moledet]

Israel is maybe a developed country, but the mindset of many people here is still far behind of the 21st century, the post you quoted is a good example of that.
He lives in Argentina so there goes your theory :-D but he's right recruiting people that don't want to serve due to their moral/culture is a disaster waiting to happen.

[Player]

in Israel, there are double standards regarding even Israeli jews in terms of who gets drafted, how about that:roll:

Yep, this is another good example of discrimination.


You have a more conservative view that everyone should be similar and if they want than they can fund their own schools and so on

Who told you that everyone should be similar? I think you mix two things together - people and their rights.

This is what democracy is about: everyone should be whatever he wishes to be and all citizens should have equal rights without any little difference.

Therefore if some citizens have different rights than some other citizens because it is based on culture, religion, ethnicity or whatever, this is wrong and doesn't belong to a democratic society.




France has an even more conservative view that all citizens must be the same and they don't allow immigrants to keep their identity.

I don't know who told you this but in France nobody forces you to be the same like everyone else. You are probably talking about rights - in France everyone has the same rights, unlike in Israel.


The IDF also tend not to force citizens to serve, if a Jewish citizen really don't want to serve than the IDF will prefer to let go because it can only damage the army drafting such a person.

Yes but the problem is that we are not talking about one single person but a whole ethnic group - this is called discrimination, and there is nothing what could justify any kind of discrimination.

[Player]

He lives in Argentina so there goes your theory :-D but he's right recruiting people that don't want to serve due to their moral/culture is a disaster waiting to happen.

Again, it's all good as long as it is on a personal level but you can't generalize a whole ethnic group because of that, even if the majority of that ethnic group wouldn't want to serve this wouldn't change anything because either all citizens should be drafted or none. This shouldn't be too hard to understand.

[Ordie]

Yep, this is another good example of discrimination.



Who told you that everyone should be similar? I think you mix two things together - people and their rights.

This is what democracy is about: everyone should be whatever he wishes to be and all citizens should have equal rights without any little difference.

Therefore if some citizens have different rights than some other citizens because it is based on culture, religion, ethnicity or whatever, this is wrong and doesn't belong to a democratic society.




I don't know who told you this but in France nobody forces you to be the same like everyone else. You are probably talking about rights - in France everyone has the same rights, unlike in Israel.



Yes but the problem is that we are not talking about one single person but a whole ethnic group - this is called discrimination, and there is nothing what could justify any kind of discrimination.

Good post....

[Moledet]

What didn't you understand in my earlier explanation? Israel encourages keeping ones identity and culture, that's the reason mosques are built by money from the state and not from Saudi Arabia like in the US. In the US you aren't encouraged to preserve your culture but also not discouraged.
This is also the reason for the agreements signed between the state and minorities like the Arab residents and the ultra orthodox. The Druze on the other hand decided that they want another agreement, that they must serve.

[Player]

Israel encourages keeping ones identity and culture, that's the reason mosques are built by money from the state and not from Saudi Arabia like in the US.

It's completely OK to let people keep their identity and culture, it's even good and democratic.
But there is a border, you can't give them different rights than those of other citizens because of this - this is the problem.



This is also the reason for the agreements signed between the state and minorities like the Arab residents and the ultra orthodox. The Druze on the other hand decided that they want another agreement, that they must serve.

It doesn't change the fact that giving Arab or Druze or Jewish citizens different rights is a discrimination. This is not how democracy works. In a democracy it is either all citizens or none - it is that simple.

[Moledet]

Player, you can, it's called Affirmative action.

[Climber]

The United States is an all volunteer force.

So? I know how the USA armed forces work, I am asking a simple question, what would happen to you in that instance, what would you think, what would you do?



He lives in Argentina so there goes your theory :-D but he's right recruiting people that don't want to serve due to their moral/culture is a disaster waiting to happen.

:bash: He is not talking about me, Vorian quoted someone else :)

Anyway, it is always the same way, people fail in trying to get the morality of one place and one situation to other places and others situations and it is not the same.

try to teach the morality of the wealthy US to the people who lives in the Villas Miseria in Buenos Aires, yeah, pretty easy from the comfort of Manhattan.

Democracy is easy talking, I have a lot of friends in the States that biatch about how the war changed their rights. When a country is at war, some things works different, or not?


And let me be clear, Arabs are allowed in the Army, even in combat units. What's the deal then?

[Ordie]

try to teach the morality of the wealthy US to the people who lives in the Villas Miseria in Buenos Aires, yeah, pretty easy from the comfort of Manhattan.

At least there's free education up through college and free clinical care in Argentina.

[Climber]

At least there's free education up through college and free clinical care in Argentina.

Yup, but is hard to go to college while with hunger. And the free health system is great, but the sanitary conditions are so bad, that the Dengue virus is spiralling here without control right now. Democracy is good but is for middle class, the day the democracy goes further and make the living better for the forgotten of the system, that day, it will be a real democracy, not a mock of it.

Anyway, Ordie, just make me a favor, answer my question.

What would you do if the guy next to you in the Army, refuses to fight along you. Please? :)

[Ordie]

What would you do if the guy next to you in the Army, refuses to fight along you. Please? :)


Keep him behind and tend to the dead and wounded.

[budgie]

The are very few 'true' refugees out there, if any.
The 'Palestinians' hasn't changed ever since 60 years ago, they are still undeveloped, still divided by different leaderships, still have tribes, hordes, hamulot, whatever you want to call it. Still the same.

The contempt here is palpable. How do you expect a divided and oppressed people to build a functioning state under occupation?


Its not just that they lost the war, they started it.

Sounds like children squabbling. But, but he started it. Waaah! The issues are a little bigger than who started it. perhaps you should ask why


'The conquest', what do you mean by that?
The United fvcking Nations of the world decided who gets what, we agreed, they started a war. the same organization that they run now crying every time they make up a new thing against 'the occupation'.

Did the UN agree to the West Bank and the Golan heights? The new settlements? I believe there is a slew of resolutions condemning continued occupation of those sites.


There is already a Palestinian nation - Jordan.

A weak copout. And one continually voiced by those opposed to Palestinian statehood. If they could have Jordan why would they fight the much stronger Israel? Why all those years of struggle/compromise/treaty/struggle and so on?


You said it, they are Moroccans, Algerians, Iraqis..
Technically, you can find a name to define them, but Arabs.

No we don't have the luxury of defining them or lumping them all into one basket. They have the privilege of defining themselves. It's immature and willfully ignorant to ignore their ethnic divisions.

[Hollis]

The contempt here is palpable. How do you expect a divided and oppressed people to build a functioning state under an occupier's jackboot?




Lets tone it down a notch or two............... If they are oppressed, look at Fatah and Hamas. Arafat made billions on the blood and suffering of the Palestinian people. Maybe check the jackboot sandals Fatah and hamas and other wear.

[budgie]

Oh I'm not defending Hamas or fatah for their actions, but I am simply pointing out that under an army of occupation for so many decades, the palestinians have not trul;y been able to build the institutions of statehood. Their own contempt for the rule of law has hindered them too but that may well be a by-product of occupation.

[Hollis]

Oh I'm not defending Hamas or fatah for their actions, but I am simply pointing out that under an army of occupation for so many decades, the palestinians have not trul;y been able to build the institutions of statehood. Their own contempt for the rule of law has hindered them too but that may well be a by-product of occupation.


Ever read about another countries that have been "occupied", maybe do some comparison research. The Palestinian people have not been able to do anything because of their heroes, like Arafat. As long a people like you fall for the PLO Propaganda, the Palestinian people will bleed, suffer and die.

A hint, Read Gandhi and India liberation. As Long as Palestinian people are rule by terrorists, who obtain support from the outside, they will bleed and bleed.

I doubt very seriously if the goal of the PLO was ever a liberated and Free Palestine. BTW how is Sura Arafat doing?

[Moledet]

The contempt here is palpable. How do you expect a divided and oppressed people to build a functioning state under occupation?

Ahm....We did it under the British.



Sounds like children squabbling. But, but he started it. Waaah! The issues are a little bigger than who started it. perhaps you should ask why

It's important since there's a HUGE difference between going on a conquest war like they did and fighting a defensive war like we did.




A weak copout. And one continually voiced by those opposed to Palestinian statehood. If they could have Jordan why would they fight the much stronger Israel? Why all those years of struggle/compromise/treaty/struggle and so on?

They did, even Araffat called Jordan Palestine but the Jordanian king butchered them in the 70s. It's only a matter of time until they will revolt again and the king knows that, he even said they are running out of time to create a Palestinian state because he knows that if there isn't a functioning state in Judah and Samaria he will be in trouble.

[Climber]

Keep him behind and tend to the dead and wounded.
A little story then:

I was in my Kibbutz in January 1991, just before living the army. My Kibbutz is just in the green line, so at the other side of the gate, across the road, it is the "west bank". north of the Kibbutz, is the arab town of Bakka.

I was working at the communal kitchen when we heard of the Scuds missiles falling over Haifa and Tel Aviv.

I heard the people living to the other side of the armistice line, cheering. I could understand that. I wouldn't do the same, but I could understand.
Then I could see and hear, people from Bakka, doing the same. They are Israelis. I felt angry.

I wouldn't want them fighting alongside me, or watching over my back, or taking care of the wounded. But it is a generalization, because, not all of them were cheering, and not all of them do the same, or think the same. They are individuals like you and me.
So, and I think wisely, the state decided, long time ago, that compelling them to do the service, would be a problem not only for the IDF but for them too, because they feel that the Israeli nationality is a burden.
Everyone ( Arabs inclusive) can volunteer, and even make a career in the IDF. As you know it is a people's army, so everyone starts as the same here. More democratic impossible.

[LRPV]

The contempt here is palpable. How do you expect a divided and oppressed people to build a functioning state under occupation?

Sounds like children squabbling. But, but he started it. Waaah! The issues are a little bigger than who started it. perhaps you should ask why


Did the UN agree to the West Bank and the Golan heights? The new settlements? I believe there is a slew of resolutions condemning continued occupation of those sites.

A weak copout. And one continually voiced by those opposed to Palestinian statehood. If they could have Jordan why would they fight the much stronger Israel? Why all those years of struggle/compromise/treaty/struggle and so on?


Budgie,
Given you use phrases like "occupation" your views are clear. Are you aware that Israel is the only country held to your standards? The US and UK as examples hold territory gained at the expense of indigenous populations yet no sqeak about returning the land.

In the case of the territories, there is an ancient Jewish connection. But importantly at law, the west bank was gained as a result of Arab belligerence. Legally, there is no requirement to return the land to the aggressor party.

As for the Golan, the same rule applies. This reference by you to the U.N. is fascinating. The U.N. is not an objective legal body, it represents political lobbies. Perhaps you might read a little history? I'll happily PM you a ISBN for a legal text outlining the legal position of the State of Israel and its current position. Of course its discourse is not Arabist so you may find being confronted by facts rather disconcerting. Propaganda propagated to your taste is always more comforting....

A copout? Well I can't apologise for historical facts...even Arafat is quoted as stating that "what you call Jordan is really Palestine".

[gustav]

Given you use phrases like "occupation" your views are clear.

So, when pro israel fanboys use the terms "Judea and Samaria" and "Palestinians are not a nation" or "they are Arabs" to negate their existence as a nation, you have no problem with it I guess? :roll:

[HellToupee]

Budgie,
Given you use phrases like "occupation" your views are clear. Are you aware that Israel is the only country held to your standards? The US and UK as examples hold territory gained at the expense of indigenous populations yet no sqeak about returning the land.


What territories does that UK occupy at the expense of local populations?

[LRPV]

So, when pro israel fanboys use the terms "Judea and Samaria" and "Palestinians are not a nation" or "they are Arabs" to negate their existence as a nation, you have no problem with it I guess? :roll:

Correct.

Judea and Samaria = West Bank. Legal history is on open source.

Palestinians are not a 'nation', they are not distinct apart from politically.

Do you realise that in the Mandate era under British rule, Palestinians were Jews and the Arabs were called...Arabs?

It was only after 1948 that terminology changed, Jews became Israelis and the term Palestinian was then applied to Arabs who claimed links to Israel.

Ahhh history...it's so interesting. Bit of a bugger when facts get in the way of politics eh?p-)

[gustav]

Correct.

Judea and Samaria = West Bank. Legal history is on open source.

Palestinians are not a 'nation', they are not distinct apart from politically.

Do you realise that in the Mandate era under British rule, Palestinians were Jews and the Arabs were called...Arabs?

It was only after 1948 that terminology changed, Jews became Israelis and the term Palestinian was then applied to Arabs who claimed links to Israel.

I do realise that, particularly in this region, different people learnt a different history and what is a "fact" for some is bullcrap for others, and the other way around.

But since you have "facts" with you...

Sometimes I grab the true meaning of "arguing on the internet".

[Climber]

I do realise that, particularly in this region, different people learnt a different history and what is a "fact" for some is bullcrap for others, and the other way around.

But since you have "facts" with you...

Sometimes I grab the true meaning of "arguing on the internet".

It happens on other regions too........................

:roll:

[LRPV]

I do realise that, particularly in this region, different people learnt a different history and what is a "fact" for some is bullcrap for others, and the other way around.



Ummm...a fact is not a malleable piece of information. What you appear to refer to is a perspective, which may be subjective and not subject to a basis in fact.

[RoyB]

It doesn't change the fact that giving Arab or Druze or Jewish citizens different rights is a discrimination. This is not how democracy works. In a democracy it is either all citizens or none - it is that simple.
Your opinion of how democracy should be seems wrong for other nations besides Israel, for example Germany.


The contempt here is palpable. How do you expect a divided and oppressed people to build a functioning state under occupation?
What occupation?
You put the blame of their division on Israel, they were divided before Israeli even existed and still are.

Sounds like children squabbling. But, but he started it. Waaah! The issues are a little bigger than who started it. perhaps you should ask why
Why? really, tell me why?
This is the just another million dollar question.

A weak copout. And one continually voiced by those opposed to Palestinian statehood. If they could have Jordan why would they fight the much stronger Israel? Why all those years of struggle/compromise/treaty/struggle and so on?
You are really asking why?
The so called Palestinian leaders themselves made millions of the suffering of the 'Palestinian' people, not just that, but their overlords in other countries benefit of their suffering and continuing struggle.

No we don't have the luxury of defining them or lumping them all into one basket. They have the privilege of defining themselves. It's immature and willfully ignorant to ignore their ethnic divisions.
Why don't listen, and read through history as advised by several members here, to learn more about 'them'.. they didn't even technically existed till 48'/67.

Oh I'm not defending Hamas or fatah for their actions, but I am simply pointing out that under an army of occupation for so many decades, the palestinians have not trul;y been able to build the institutions of statehood. Their own contempt for the rule of law has hindered them too but that may well be a by-product of occupation.
a by product? yes, at the beginning they were all united, singing tunes together and conducting dance festivals, but when the occupation arrived, it tore them apart from within!

So, when pro israel fanboys use the terms "Judea and Samaria" and "Palestinians are not a nation" or "they are Arabs" to negate their existence as a nation, you have no problem with it I guess? :roll:
What wrong with stating facts?

[HellToupee]

Ummm...a fact is not a malleable piece of information. What you appear to refer to is a perspective, which may be subjective and not subject to a basis in fact.

A fact is not a malleable peice of information yes, but what is presented and consumed as fact is infact very malleable, like some of the things you are trying to present as "facts"

[gustav]

Ummm...a fact is not a malleable piece of information. What you appear to refer to is a perspective, which may be subjective and not subject to a basis in fact.


Of course it is highly malleable since you can interpret it, example: there were Jews and Arabs in Palestine before the establishment of Israel. From that, interpretations differ and what follows are called "facts" by the two parties: Palestinians say they were a majority, Israelis say they were not a nation, Palestinans retort that they were, etc...

[LRPV]

A fact is not a malleable peice of information yes, but what is presented and consumed as fact is infact very malleable, like some of the things you are trying to present as "facts"

Examples please. I'm happy to clarify or support my case.

You also appear to actively distort what I have written. I have differentiated between fact and opinion.

[LRPV]

A fact is not a malleable peice of information yes, but what is presented and consumed as fact is infact very malleable, like some of the things you are trying to present as "facts"


Of course it is highly malleable since you can interpret it, example: there were Jews and Arabs in Palestine before the establishment of Israel. From that, interpretations differ and what follows are called "facts" by the two parties: Palestinians say they were a majority, Israelis say they were not a nation, Palestinans retort that they were, etc...

You guys are a good team. All you need now are some facts....

[gustav]

You guys are a good team. All you need now are some facts....

No as good as the "Israel strong" team, I guess :)

FACTS: a guy coming from Ukraine with a gun shows up one day in front of your house and tells you its no longer yours. p-)

Better?

[LRPV]

No as good as the "Israel strong" team, I guess :)


FACTS: a guy coming from Ukraine with a gun shows up one day in front of your house and tells you its no longer yours. p-)

Better?


Ah....but did I legally own the house? p-)

[gustav]

Ah....but did I legally own the house? p-)

Ah but we will have to check the Talmud for that... Mr Mohamed, according to this book your not the legal occupant of this land, it has always belonged to Mr chinavsky (currently living in Kiev).......Wot?

[Climber]

Of course it is highly malleable since you can interpret it, example: there were Jews and Arabs in Palestine before the establishment of Israel. From that, interpretations differ and what follows are called "facts" by the two parties: Palestinians say they were a majority, Israelis say they were not a nation, Palestinans retort that they were, etc...


Interpretation differ, but a good historian knows how to check facts, by the documents, the files.

And that is not an opinion, it is a fact.

[Climber]

No as good as the "Israel strong" team, I guess :)

FACTS: a guy coming from Ukraine with a gun shows up one day in front of your house and tells you its no longer yours. p-)

Better?


that's a fact? and when that happened?

If that happens to me, I will shot the guy and look how he run down the street.

Now, why are you calling that a fact? that happened to you? because it didn't happened to me.

If you are saying that a metaphor or and example is the same as a fact, we are in problems here.

[gustav]

that's a fact? and when that happened?

If that happens to me, I will shot the guy and look how he run down the street.

Now, why are you calling that a fact? that happened to you? because it didn't happened to me.

If you are saying that a metaphor or and example is the same as a fact, we are in problems here.


It happened to a lot of people in 1948. Palestinians call it the Nakba.

[Climber]

It happened to a lot of people in 1948. Palestinians call it the Nakba.
No, it didn't happen that way, not the way you said. That's propaganda.

And who is the Ukranian dude you are talking about?

.

[RoyB]

It happened to a lot of people in 1948. Palestinians call it the Nakba.
So Jews came to Palestinians homes and told them to GTFO or they'll shoot them?
LEARN SOME ****ING HISTORY!
And that goes for any poster here who can't back up his comment.

[gustav]

No, it didn't happen that way, not the way you said. That's propaganda.


And we end up where we began.


I do realise that, particularly in this region, different people learnt a different history and what is a "fact" for some is bullcrap for others, and the other way around.

[Climber]

So Jews came to Palestinians homes and told them to GTFO or they'll shoot them?
LEARN SOME ****ING HISTORY!
And that goes for any poster here who can't back up his comment.

Yup, I agree, stop the propaganda.

I can discuss facts, and I can back up my opinions, I can agree in disagreement, and I can say I am wrong, but I won't discuss propaganda and stupid metaphors about Ukrainian dudes with guns.

[Climber]

And we end up where we began.

no, you end were you began, because you don't know what a fact is and where to look for fact.

Everybody have an opinion, everybody is subjective, have interest, and I can accept that.

I am willing to accept that, but I can't accept the discuss this trough things like:


Originally Posted by gustav http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?p=4064859#post4064859)
No as good as the "Israel strong" team, I guess :-)

FACTS: a guy coming from Ukraine with a gun shows up one day in front of your house and tells you its no longer yours. p-)

Better?
That's a HS quality discussion, and I am too old for that.

[Hollis]

Ah but we will have to check the Talmud for that... Mr Mohamed, according to this book your not the legal occupant of this land, it has always belonged to Mr chinavsky (currently living in Kiev).......Wot?


Gustav, I doubt that you read the Qur'an, Because the Qur'an clearly states who Israel belongs too and it is the Jews. Try reading the Sura Al Maedah. Secondly I doubt that you ever saw a Talmud or read it or........ It seems to me, you just reiterating what someone has told you or that you read from a site antagonistic to Israel.

Also Up to 1948, everyone was a Palestinian. Palestine to day, is more based on the definition developed in 1967.


Maybe do some research.

[budgie]

Budgie,
Given you use phrases like "occupation" your views are clear. Are you aware that Israel is the only country held to your standards? The US and UK as examples hold territory gained at the expense of indigenous populations yet no sqeak about returning the land.



Oh, sorry didn't realize this thread is about Diego Garcia.

And the post quoted contains no fewer than eight uses of the words "you" or "your". Try to separate the politics from the man.

[Climber]

Oh, sorry didn't realize this thread is about Diego Garcia.

And the post quoted contains no fewer than eight uses of the words "you" or "your". Try to separate the politics from the man.

Why Diego Garcia?p-)

[Ordie]

Why Diego Garcia?p-)

Diego Garcia was a French Colony with Copra Plantation with indentured workers from India.

After the Napoleonic Wars, it was handed over the the British who in turn kept the plantation and created a coaling station for passing ships.

Decendants of these Roman Catholic Patois speaking plantation workers are called Illios (Islanders) who were born, raised and died on Diego Garcia. Not to mention subjects of the crown.

Around the early 1970s' the US leased Diego Garcia as a strategic base. Part of the agreement was that no locals are allowed to be on the island. The Brits forcibly evacuated the islanders and shipped them to Mauritius where they ended up in limbo.

Since then, there has been many lawsuits and press about the islanders plight. The UK government now allows them to settle in the UK as citizens but still prevents thier return to Diego Garcia.

[Climber]

Thanks Ordie.

[Dr_Fünke]

Right.
Because prior to 47'-48' we constantly attacked Arab villages, and committed slaughters..

that's correct. and well documented.



Sure.
Because all we want is land,

how could anybody think anything else after reading comments from various Israeli founders/statesmen/politicians?

[Dr_Fünke]

So, you was referring to what then? because your post was referring at the time of the Israeli foundation.

Some other countries get "free" or got "free" weapons in the past and now.

i asked you before and I ask you again, do you care to explain your point?

the land awarded to jews was the foothold they needed to seize what they have now. none of the parties involved at the time were under any illusion that they wouldn't spill over the borders and grow 'their' state



Again, check your facts. you are wrong.

zionist forces seized land across the border before arab armies moved in, which they did to stop more ethnic cleansing and land theft

[LRPV]

Oh, sorry didn't realize this thread is about Diego Garcia.

And the post quoted contains no fewer than eight uses of the words "you" or "your". Try to separate the politics from the man.

So Diego is out? Ok, so if your opinions only apply to Israel then it would appear my sense of your perception is correct.

It's your politics you are espousing, read your last hundred posts. At least be honest enough to be open about your anti-Israel stance, take a lead from Dr Funke.

[Dr_Fünke]

Budgie,
Given you use phrases like "occupation" your views are clear. Are you aware that Israel is the only country held to your standards? The US and UK as examples hold territory gained at the expense of indigenous populations yet no sqeak about returning the land.

In the case of the territories, there is an ancient Jewish connection. But importantly at law, the west bank was gained as a result of Arab belligerence. Legally, there is no requirement to return the land to the aggressor party.

so whats the point of having laws?

what a coincidence it is that the only country in the world which recognizes the so called legality of the west bank colonies is the occupying power rofl

[Dr_Fünke]

At least be honest enough to be open about your anti-Israel stance, take a lead from Dr Funke.


why don't you add 'unaustralian' to the list :roll:

[Zeev]

Israel is maybe a developed country, but the mindset of many people here is still far behind of the 21st century, the post you quoted is a good example of that.

hey, when you face to barbarians that want to erase you, you cannot stay an angel any longer. Or yes you can, and get fvcked up very fast :)

[LRPV]

so whats the point of having laws?

what a coincidence it is that the only country in the world which recognizes the so called legality of the west bank colonies is the occupying power rofl

The latter point was well played. Unfortunately it lacks validity beyond superficial examination. Political recognition is not the same as a legal position. You'll find some interesting examples in the major powers recognition or otherwise of territorial waters. But it was a nice try, it made me smile...:)

[RoyB]

that's correct. and well documented.
OK, than prove it.

how could anybody think anything else after reading comments from various Israeli founders/statesmen/politicians?
Again, prove it.

zionist forces seized land across the border before arab armies moved in, which they did to stop more ethnic cleansing and land theft
What ethnic cleansing?
Seriously, why don't you put up some evidences for everything you say, because every little thing you said till now is nothing than bull crap.

[budgie]

So Diego is out? Ok, so if your opinions only apply to Israel then it would appear my sense of your perception is correct.

It's your politics you are espousing, read your last hundred posts. At least be honest enough to be open about your anti-Israel stance, take a lead from Dr Funke.


I am not anti-Israel. I have no need to be "honest" about a "stance" that others have mistakenly (or through their own black vs white bias) assigned to me. I see the conflict in nuanced and multi-sided tones.

I have repeatedly stated that I am behind a two-state solution. One of those states is Israel so I am not "anti-Israel". Anyone who has read my own "last hundred posts" can see that if their own bias doesn't cloud their judgement.

Accusing me of dishonesty is a personal, ad-hominem attack. Forcing someone to defend their own personal stance rather than debating the issues at hand detracts from the larger argument and derails the thread. This is the political discussion thread not the "personal attacks and internet bullying forum."

[Flamming_Python]

hey, when you face to barbarians that want to erase you, you cannot stay an angel any longer. Or yes you can, and get fvcked up very fast :)

Remember that every action has a consequence, somewhere down the line. If you resort to more and more morally reprehensible methods to win a war; make an ever increasing amount of deals with the devil so to speak; you may win but there will always be a price to pay down the line; which may or may not include another war.

On the other hand, 'staying an angel' so to speak; well yes you may not win, but then again perhaps you will win anyway, and you won't have the face the penalties of your methods. Historically such people have always been considered fools; but when these fools do win, it is always they who achieve the best results.

[Zeev]

Remember that every action has a consequence, somewhere down the line. If you resort to more and more morally reprehensible methods to win a war; make an ever increasing amount of deals with the devil so to speak; you may win but there will always be a price to pay down the line; which may or may not include another war.

On the other hand, 'staying an angel' so to speak; well yes you may not win, but then again perhaps you will win anyway, and you won't have the face the penalties of your methods. Historically such people have always been considered fools; but when these fools do win, it is always they who achieve the best results.

I think that Israel proves many times that he could be much more harsh with its ennemies than he was, Israeli military actions were never made to create great civilian losses and injuries, rather the contrary.

[kahn267]

I agree with Zeev...
the past few conflicts/wars Israel has fought, has always been shrouded with huge news propaganda that has put huge political pressure on Israel to stop its offensives.

Israel always gives in to political pressure which I believe bites it in the ass. i.e Lebanon 2006, UN pressure forced Israel to stop its offensive and allow Hezbollah rebuild and flourish, rather then ending it once and for all..

Israel's wars/conflicts are forever kept to the garden maintenance analogy, where instead of removing the unwanted overbearing plants (Hamas, Hezbollah etc), they prefer to trim its hedges as short as possible (short term offensives).

[budgie]

I agree with Zeev...
the past few conflicts/wars Israel has fought, has always been shrouded with huge news propaganda that has put huge political pressure on Israel to stop its offensives.

Israel always gives in to political pressure which I believe bites it in the ass. i.e Lebanon 2006, UN pressure forced Israel to stop its offensive and allow Hezbollah rebuild and flourish, rather then ending it once and for all..

Israel's wars/conflicts are forever kept to the garden maintenance analogy, where instead of removing the unwanted overbearing plants (Hamas, Hezbollah etc), they prefer to trim its hedges as short as possible (short term offensives).


I thinks it's playing the victim to think that Isarel's success has been stymied by international pressure to curtail the amount of force used.

Hizbollah and Hamas are Iran sponsored crazies that are not particularly popular in the region or the world, but the humanitarian costs of these conflicts have simply been too high for most of the world community to stomach. Because these groups hide among the population (and sadly because of their own image as the underdogs enjoy broad civilian support) the civilian toll has been unreasonably high in Israeli offensives.

It's also naive to think that if Israel were only allowed off the leash then Hizbollah or Hamas could be wiped out completely. The history of guerrilla warfare suggests that without massive slaughter and subjugation of the civilian populations that support them, they will continue to be a thorn in Israel's side.

As distasteful as it may be recent sectarian conflicts (such as Northern Ireland) that sought to engage and include all parties in the peace process have proven more successful. hamas may espouse unreasonable claims such as the destruction of Israel but they are hardly in a position to make it happen.

Israel has the military power and can negotiate from a position of strength and sooner or later, hamas will have to accept some compromises.

[LRPV]

I have repeatedly stated that I am behind a two-state solution. One of those states is Israel so I am not "anti-Israel".

A two State solution in the current environment is hardly a neutral stance.

Accusing me of dishonesty is a personal, ad-hominem attack. Forcing someone to defend their own personal stance rather than debating the issues at hand detracts from the larger argument and derails the thread. This is the political discussion thread not the "personal attacks and internet bullying forum."

If you log on to the forum and represent views without clearly stating they are not your personal views, you invite readers to assume a level of personal support.

As for "internet bullying", harden-up. If you really believe my posts to be "bullying" then I suggest you report them for moderation.

[LRPV]

Frankly, I'd rather not get that "special treatment" that has historically been accorded the Jewish people.

But a Balkan entering an Israel/Palestine thread with such a post is bound to be....evocativep-)

[Climber]

Lol why do jews always get that speciall treatment.. Everytime u critiaize them, and let me be clear Jews in "israel" / "israel" u are an antisemit. Where was that way of thinking when the US bombed the hell out of Yugoslavia? Didnt we save like alot of ur soldiers during ww2? naah but jews must have this shield of non critisism.. Grow up ffs no one cares what happend 60 years ago when we are critisising u now..


roflroflrofl @ "the Jews"

Naah theres nothing wrong with an balkanian entering :P Dont worry im not going to mess anything up.. Personally im quite neutrall to this conflict frankly i dont care.. Its just that when someone critisize them then all the sudden ur a natzi and stuff.. Jews i dont have any problems with at all.

Cool, because my 5 yo son, that is a jew, have not any problems with you either.

[RoyB]

Lol why do jews always get that speciall treatment.. Everytime u critiaize them, and let me be clear Jews in "israel" / "israel" u are an antisemit. Where was that way of thinking when the US bombed the hell out of Yugoslavia? Didnt we save like alot of ur soldiers during ww2? naah but jews must have this shield of non critisism.. Grow up ffs no one cares what happend 60 years ago when we are critisising u now..
Oh god I ****ing hate that 'argument'..
I mean, did someone actually called some one here an anti-Semite? a Nazi?
Also funny is that people are complaining about the Jews being 'immune', while the people who are really are a immune are the guys on the other side, but hey, try not to angry them!

[budgie]

If you log on to the forum and represent views without clearly stating they are not your personal views, you invite readers to assume a level of personal support.

As for "internet bullying", harden-up. If you really believe my posts to be "bullying" then I suggest you report them for moderation.

I rarely step off my high-horse and descend from the level of debate into argument, but you don't seem to know the difference between them. Debate= issues; argument=personalities. And you think you have the right to 'name and shame' me and my politics for all here to see. You don't know me. I've stated my position and on my politics and get this: on my position, my word is the final word - you don't get to explain me to all and sundry colored with your own bias.

So if you think I'm categorically 'anti-Israel' it is time to pony up the evidence: How am I anti-Israel? Where in my posts have I espoused a view - in line with Hamas and Iran - that the state of Israel doesn't have the right to exist and should be dismantled or destroyed? How does that square away with my repeated assertions that I believe in the two-state solution and that Israel as a state has the right to exist?

Simply being displeased by Israel's heavy-handedness at times doesn't count. It certainly doesn't constitute being anti Israel. Pony up with the freakin' evidence. Prove I am "anti-Israel".

[gilgoul]

I thinks it's playing the victim to think that Isarel's success has been stymied by international pressure to curtail the amount of force used.

It is both clear and well documented that Israel has always been "cut short of it's victories" as the man of the street would say.
From the arm embargo of 1948 that would benefit only the arab countries (weapons already in place) to the UNSC1701, even though the Ol;ert government and the israeli media tried to sell us that crap as a "major achievement".


Hizbollah and Hamas are Iran sponsored crazies that are not particularly popular in the region or the world, but the humanitarian costs of these conflicts have simply been too high for most of the world community to stomach. Because these groups hide among the population (and sadly because of their own image as the underdogs enjoy broad civilian support) the civilian toll has been unreasonably high in Israeli offensives.

And yet, the Hamas has been "democratically" elected, before it performed it's own version of the night of the long knifes a year later.
The Hisb is going to be too "democratically" elected, as the Islamists of Turkey, the parliament of Sudan and Egypt, and a growing faction in Jordan.


It's also naive to think that if Israel were only allowed off the leash then Hizbollah or Hamas could be wiped out completely. The history of guerrilla warfare suggests that without massive slaughter and subjugation of the civilian populations that support them, they will continue to be a thorn in Israel's side.

Naive, but being denied freedom of action by foreign powers is tantamount to downright ingerence and imperialism.
The history of guerilla warfare, as illustrated by the French military victory but political failure in Algeria for instance, proves that without domestic and international support, one is doomed to failure.
The question is then, why do most western democracies support the establishment of a fascistoid and aggressive state while all it proposes is more violence, more war, and eventually more innocent victims on both sides.

As distasteful as it may be recent sectarian conflicts (such as Northern Ireland) that sought to engage and include all parties in the peace process have proven more successful. hamas may espouse unreasonable claims such as the destruction of Israel but they are hardly in a position to make it happen.

And?
Then we sign a peace treaty on toilet paper and wait for the next jihadist diarreah?
Or do we appease all arab claims by autodestructing?



Israel has the military power and can negotiate from a position of strength and sooner or later, hamas will have to accept some compromises.

The god old story of "give them a state, and they'll be reasonable"
Well, been there, done that, and all we saw was more corruption, more weapon buying, and eventually more deads.
No, as our FM Libierman correctly stated, time has come to change the setting of those negociations, and tell the palestinians and the world this:
Peace means good intentions, good neighnorhood, respect of agreements and respect of the other's right to live.

[budgie]

Circular arguments Gilgoul. Either Israel accepts a proper two-state solution or the current levels of violence and unrest go on indefinitely. Simple as that. A Palestinian state may not be want we want it to be but it will be a start, and will eventually reduce the unrest.

[Atlantic Friend]

Oh god I ****ing hate that 'argument'..
I mean, did someone actually called some one here an anti-Semite? a Nazi?

Er...the article's author, for starters, since he explains criticism of Israel by a deep-running antisemite undercurrent and the Holocaust.

[tanks_alot]

Circular arguments Gilgoul. Either Israel accepts a proper two-state solution or the current levels of violence and unrest go on indefinitely. Simple as that. A Palestinian state may not be want we want it to be but it will be a start, and will eventually reduce the unrest.
I'm sure you meant a three states solution, right? otherwise i would suggest you do some reading before choosing to comment on Middle Eastern issues. p-)

[spider1]

I think we need to annex the West Bank(like we annexed the Golan and East Jerusalem) and to end their dreams on a state.

[Hollis]

Circular arguments Gilgoul. Either Israel accepts a proper two-state solution or the current levels of violence and unrest go on indefinitely. Simple as that. A Palestinian state may not be want we want it to be but it will be a start, and will eventually reduce the unrest.


I ran across this and thought you would appreciate it:

http://www.bopsecrets.org/SI/11.wars.htm

The dichotomies of the cold war tend to say one's own self interests is more important than their ideologies. A lot of people seem to trade their ethics for a hand few of bobbles (or pieces of gold).

[NimDod]

I think we need to annex the West Bank(like we annexed the Golan and East Jerusalem) and to end their dreams on a state.

were you being sarcastic or are you really that stupid?

[Hollis]

were you being sarcastic or are you really that stupid?


I think he likes this forum's free vacation plans...........

[Player]

I think we need to annex the West Bank(like we annexed the Golan and East Jerusalem) and to end their dreams on a state.

I would get banned for describing how terrible you are.

[Climber]

were you being sarcastic or are you really that stupid?

He likes to be banned every two days.....

And he is not beign sarcastic.

[Walter Sobchak]

Once again the pro-Israel crowd fails to see the problem objectively. Europe condemns Israel's heavy-handedness therefore they must be against the Jews. Bravo. Anything short of recognizing Israel's indisputable right to govern all of the promised land and expell every last Palestinian must be anti-semitism right?

Objectively? Look in the mirror. What the article states is very clear. Nowhere did it state, "anything short of recognizing Israel's indisputable right to govern all of the promised land and expell every last Palestinian must be anti-semitism". Remember the two-state solution? Oslo? How many cease-fires have the Palestinians broken?


It can't be that simple. Both peoples have to live there and this is something the extremists on both sides (and on the other side of the atlantic) need to grasp. The Palestinians must have their own state too eventually. This is not a matter of personal preference or biblical prophecy or favoring one side over the other. A two-state solution is the only possible end to this chaos.

It is. Really. Peace has been offered by Israel, but as long as the Iranian-lead and -funded Hamas and Hezbollah are present, there will be no peace. Do you think that Iran supports these groups out of some type of altruism or because they want peace with Israel? Is Ahmadjenidad just joking when he calls for the destruction of Israel? Why doesn't Europe condemn both sides, equally?

You talk of Israel's heavy-handedness... isn't the fact that they have not eradicated Gaza maybe a sign of just the opposite? I suggest that you read Friedman's "From Beiruit to Jerusalem" and focus on "Hama Rules"; THAT is what passes for business-as-usual in the middle east. As the article states, if the shoe was on the other foot, would Hamas not totally wipe out Israel?


Apart from that, it is an age-old conflict that threatens and destabilizes the whole region and by extent the rest of the world. The Palestine problem fuels worldwide terror and jeopardizes energy supplies, and that's why it gets more attention than Congo. Not because Europeans are feeling uneasy about the Jews.

Age old? Palestine has never existed. Israel has been a recognized nation state since 1948 and, if you are a believer in the Old Testament, way before that. Where was Israel when Gaza was occupied by Egypt and the West Bank by Jordan? Israel didn't "occupy" that land until 1967.

What about in 1970 when King Hussein of Jordan kicked the living sh*t out of the Palestinians, who were de-stabilizing his nation, and drove them out to Lebanon? In fact, Arafat's "Black September" drew its name from that time and not from anything the Jews ever did!

Europe is and has always been anti-smeitic under the surface. It's simply a fact. With the exception of the Danes, the Germans had way too much help rounding up Europe's Jews in WWII. Learn your history, folks...

[alexz]

Circular arguments Gilgoul. Either Israel accepts a proper two-state solution or the current levels of violence and unrest go on indefinitely. Simple as that. A Palestinian state may not be want we want it to be but it will be a start, and will eventually reduce the unrest.

Israel accpted the two state solution as it was passed in the parliaments (by a single vote). Ever since the idea of the two state solution came alive the number of Israelis killed by terrorism quadropled. Before 67 and before the state of Israel was created the same terrorist targeted Jews and they will continue to do so if there is a 2 state, 3 state or 4 state solution. The goal of hamas is not to create a Palestinian state or peace deal but to create an Islamic state in what is now Israel which will be a part of a larger Islamic state just like at the times of Mohamad. States, borders, signed pieces of paper are not the concern of the Islamic brotherhood and its ofshots like AQ and hamas. What's ironic is that they are clear about their goals but those that are conidered as their enemy lie to defened them.

[gilgoul]

Circular arguments Gilgoul. Either Israel accepts a proper two-state solution or the current levels of violence and unrest go on indefinitely. Simple as that. A Palestinian state may not be want we want it to be but it will be a start, and will eventually reduce the unrest.

Not a circular argument, but let's simplfy:

You say: You Israelis are the strong dude in the hood, and the Nerd called palestine is shooting with a pen blowgun just because your sitting on his chair.

I say: The nerd called palestine has 22 other buddies in the classroom, some who do some business with Israel and some who don't accept this kid who left before they were here and came back just recently.

The first element you forget is, once again, the size, true political, economic, diplomatic and military power of the 22 other states of the area, who also love to pick on the nerd, aka palestine, because is stupid stutborn and a bit retard.

I'll stop the condescending analogies right now, but get that clear, we have been "unclenching" for the last 20 years, a generation of kids who were told as kids there wouldn't be a need for an army when they turn 18 are now serving around Gaza and Hebron, because, and on that, PROOVE ME WRONG, because their leader maximo, aka Yassir Arafat, felt he could pressure Israel into more concessions, or felt he didn't want the burden and accountability of a real state.

But for real, what do you want us to do?
give us your program, what measures to implement NOW, on the ISraeli side.
Because, if everything is because of the "occupation", I don't see why there was a war in 1967, nor in 1956, nor in 48-49, or 36, 0r 29, 0r 21 for that matter.