or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Israeli army helicopter kills at least 20 protestors with missiles...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Israeli army helicopter kills at least 20 protestors with missiles... - Page 7

post #241 of 260
Sorry, I didn't mean it to be a cheap shot.

I agree that Israel could wipe out all of the Palestinians with relative ease, even without nuclear weapons. I don't think that's a fair assessment of their restraint though.

Just like the US solders in Iraq, we could be doing far worse to the people we've put in prison but that doesn't make the limited amout of torture we're responsible for OK.

Does that make sense?
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #242 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
Sorry, I didn't mean it to be a cheap shot.

I agree that Israel could wipe out all of the Palestinians with relative ease, even without nuclear weapons. I don't think that's a fair assessment of their restraint though.

I agree, I think however that a fair measurement for Israel's restraint is the relatively low number of Palestinian casualties it has caused and the high proportion of combatants within these numbers (considering most combat takes place in highly populated urban areas of the WB&G) - As I have said before the numbers speak for themselves. any human death is truly tragic but the numbers must be measured against comparable results from other conflicts in other parts of the world and when this is done - it becomes obvious that the IDF is way more restrained then most armed forces around the world and takes far greater care with regards to civilian non combatant's lives then most others do under similar circumstances...

Quote:
Just like the US solders in Iraq, we could be doing far worse to the people we've put in prison but that doesn't make the limited amout of torture we're responsible for OK.

Does that make sense?

Yes I that's better... I agree that many IDF actions are unnecessary, brutal or result in errors which should never have happened. Israel (like any other country at war) has much to answer for - but so do the Palestinians.

Trying to exnorate Palestinians from responsibility for the consequences of their choices and actions is both condescending and almost bordering on racist because its sends the message that those "innocent" "backwards" natives don't know any better and therefore should not be treated as adult human beings. On the same level is trying to claim Jews can do whatever they like because the Nazis did what they did to them... silly isn't it?!
Nor is it a valid argument to claim that since Palestinians are the weaker side militarily they should carry less then the full responsibility for their actions - they are still very much capable of inflicting death and destruction on Israel. and don't forget that it only took 18 man armed only with box cutters to bring the WTC down... High Tech weaponry is not necessarily a measurement of destructive potential...

The only way to avoid these hopeless situations is for the fighting to stop - from both sides not just the Israeli or the Palestinian

Do you not agree?
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Reply
Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
-- Benjamin Franklin, 1759
Reply
post #243 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by rashumon
The only way to avoid these hopeless situations is for the fighting to stop - from both sides not just the Israeli or the Palestinian

Do you not agree?

Absolutely.

I certainly don't support arming the Palestinians so they can 'better' defend themselves, but I also don't support leaving Israel in the occupied territories or settlements. Israel needs to back out of the held land before it can legitimately consider itself defending as opposed to attacking.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #244 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by rashumon




OK, if Im wrong please list for me a few of those major military operations undertaken by the IDF in Gaza during the Oslo years take that as a challenge!





Under the Oslo accords Israel ceded sovereign control over the entire population of the Gaza strip and a vast majority of the Population of the WB to the Palestinian authority!

http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/myths/mf22.html#oo

Israel engaged in negotiations with the Palestinians at Oslo and afterward because Israelis desperately crave peace and because they do not want to control the lives of Palestinians. After withdrawing from most of the Gaza Strip and more than 40 percent of the West Bank, approximately 98 percent of the Palestinian population came under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority. Most of their affairs are now controlled by Yasser Arafat's regime, and if Israel has its way, negotiations will lead to the Palestinian Authority assuming full control over the lives of all the Palestinians living in what will eventually be a Palestinian state.

...

Oh really??? Hang on Im lost here you say Israel started all those wars, right?! If that was the case why would it need to provoke the Arabs? Either Israel started the wars or the Arabs did (after being provoked by the evil Zionists) make your mind up

And please give me examples of what Israeli massacres led to the wars in 48, 67 and 73 facts, dates sources would be welcome!



LOL this is your most ridiculous claim yet! During the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s Arab states surrounding Israel were SOVIET client states not US controlled puppets one of the main reasons the US came close to Israel in the first place was that they both shared a common enemy the USSR!!!
AGAIN, can you give me one (just ONE) example of the US stopping the Arabs achieving their well earned victories over the evil Zionists? Show me an event during the 48, 67, or 73 wars where the US stopped the Arabs by applying diplomatic pressure.

This statement gets even more funny in light of the fact that the US was the one to stoped Israel (along with France and Britain) from crunching Egypt up in the Suez crisis in 1956 and again in 1973 when IDF forces crossed the Suez and captured the bridgehead to Cairo!

Oh, yes you are wrong in every regard of the lies you have presented here. The problem is you have the US/Israel-propaganda you can draw from, and like I said already the US's ideological and diplomatic support for Israel includes the overtaking of Israel's propaganda-lies. It's not about media like TV or radio, there is also no jewish conspiracy controlling the media, no the propaganda-system works before the media comes into play.

1. History-books espescially school-history-books up until today, and all university-history-books during the coldwar were written in favour of Israel, basically supporting the propaganda of Israel in every way:

For example the offensive wars Israel has started were portraited as defensive wars, for example the myths of Israel's recreation in a deserted and unpopulated land are simply copied, for example the myths about the jews in the arabic countries living for centuries there then suddenly forced to leave...

lies and propaganda turned into official history during the coldwar-times by the US.

That are the sources you and other Israel-fanaticals can draw from, quoting and linking from propaganda, as if that makes any of these lies more credible.

2. The Oslo agreements I and II as well as the Camp David-agreements were nothing more than agreements that should pave the way for a victors-peace favouring Israel as the victor. Regardless of how many times you want to claim otherwise, no agreement so far allows the palestinians to have control of more than 5% of the occupied areas. Just to illustrate that observation, the palestinians aren't allowed to drill new wells in the occupied areas.
An additional illustration that even that 5%-control has been taken back by Israel is the fact that Ramallah, where the palestinian have their authorities located is under Israel-siege for years now.

3. You challenged me by saying what military operations Israel had commited in the Oslo-years. You must be joking, there were numerous, but most were done while banning reporters of the occupied areas, espescially in the time the labor-party was in power. And perhaps you have forgotten it, but we are still in the Oslo-years! So, the operation this thread was opened for is another example.

4. Your point about my socalled contradiction about the 67-war is a real sign of your reading-skills and comprehension: Israel started that war by commiting massacres in the occupied areas with the help of the Unit 101 of Ariel Sharon and by air-bombardments. The arabic neighbours reacted with vocal condemnation of Israel's actions. Israel needed those vocal condemnations and threats of the arabic countries so that it can start the wars while saying it was necessary before the arabic countries destroy Israel, propaganda at its best.
The secret agencies of Israel and USA analysed the troops and weapons of the arabic countries and found out that they were not nearly on the level of Israel's army and weapons, but that in a few years the progress would lead to an arabic advantage, and that the time was ripe for a war before that happens.

5. Again you are wrong about the arabic countries being Soviet-clients. Jordan, Syria, and Saudi-Arabia as well as Egypt had US-puppet-regimes which consisted of one-party-dictatorships or monarchies. They also made deals with the Soviet-Union, but only in close contact with the US, for example so that the US could learn more about the Soviet-Union's weapons, tanks, and jets.
Iraq was one of those countries that was a Soviet-Union-client, but that was changed in the CIA-supported coup of the Baathists in 1963.
Whenever a US-puppet-regime-leader played a double-game with the US he got assassinated.

6. The last example of yours is the best proof of my claims: The US stopped Israel from conquering Egypt's capital in 56 not only because the US was not informed by this Israel-France-Britain-deal trying to undo the Suez-Canal-nationalising, but also because Egypt had a US-puppet-regime, which means Egypt is the protege of the US.
The plan is to establish an Israel which works as a US-military-base near the arabic countries, so that when the US-puppet-regimes are toppled, the US can enter the scene via Israel, and Israel always serves as an enduring threat: If the US-puppet-regimes don't obey, the US won't restrain Israel anymore...

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #245 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by Nightcrawler
Oh, yes you are wrong in every regard of the lies you have presented here. The problem is you have the US/Israel-propaganda you can draw from, and like I said already the US's ideological and diplomatic support for Israel includes the overtaking of Israel's propaganda-lies. It's not about media like TV or radio, there is also no jewish conspiracy controlling the media, no the propaganda-system works before the media comes into play.

1. History-books espescially school-history-books up until today, and all university-history-books during the coldwar were written in favour of Israel, basically supporting the propaganda of Israel in every way:

For example the offensive wars Israel has started were portraited as defensive wars, for example the myths of Israel's recreation in a deserted and unpopulated land are simply copied, for example the myths about the jews in the arabic countries living for centuries there then suddenly forced to leave...

lies and propaganda turned into official history during the coldwar-times by the US.

That are the sources you and other Israel-fanaticals can draw from, quoting and linking from propaganda, as if that makes any of these lies more credible.

2. The Oslo agreements I and II as well as the Camp David-agreements were nothing more than agreements that should pave the way for a victors-peace favouring Israel as the victor. Regardless of how many times you want to claim otherwise, no agreement so far allows the palestinians to have control of more than 5% of the occupied areas. Just to illustrate that observation, the palestinians aren't allowed to drill new wells in the occupied areas.
An additional illustration that even that 5%-control has been taken back by Israel is the fact that Ramallah, where the palestinian have their authorities located is under Israel-siege for years now.

3. You challenged me by saying what military operations Israel had commited in the Oslo-years. You must be joking, there were numerous, but most were done while banning reporters of the occupied areas, espescially in the time the labor-party was in power. And perhaps you have forgotten it, but we are still in the Oslo-years! So, the operation this thread was opened for is another example.

4. Your point about my socalled contradiction about the 67-war is a real sign of your reading-skills and comprehension: Israel started that war by commiting massacres in the occupied areas with the help of the Unit 101 of Ariel Sharon and by air-bombardments. The arabic neighbours reacted with vocal condemnation of Israel's actions. Israel needed those vocal condemnations and threats of the arabic countries so that it can start the wars while saying it was necessary before the arabic countries destroy Israel, propaganda at its best.
The secret agencies of Israel and USA analysed the troops and weapons of the arabic countries and found out that they were not nearly on the level of Israel's army and weapons, but that in a few years the progress would lead to an arabic advantage, and that the time was ripe for a war before that happens.

5. Again you are wrong about the arabic countries being Soviet-clients. Jordan, Syria, and Saudi-Arabia as well as Egypt had US-puppet-regimes which consisted of one-party-dictatorships or monarchies. They also made deals with the Soviet-Union, but only in close contact with the US, for example so that the US could learn more about the Soviet-Union's weapons, tanks, and jets.
Iraq was one of those countries that was a Soviet-Union-client, but that was changed in the CIA-supported coup of the Baathists in 1963.
Whenever a US-puppet-regime-leader played a double-game with the US he got assassinated.

6. The last example of yours is the best proof of my claims: The US stopped Israel from conquering Egypt's capital in 56 not only because the US was not informed by this Israel-France-Britain-deal trying to undo the Suez-Canal-nationalising, but also because Egypt had a US-puppet-regime, which means Egypt is the protege of the US.
The plan is to establish an Israel which works as a US-military-base near the arabic countries, so that when the US-puppet-regimes are toppled, the US can enter the scene via Israel, and Israel always serves as an enduring threat: If the US-puppet-regimes don't obey, the US won't restrain Israel anymore...

Nightcrawler

You are such a victim.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #246 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by Tulkas
You are such a victim.

Stop whining.

"Ooh, I'm Jewish, I'm such a victim. I'm so oppressed. Anti-semitism is everywhere."

Whine, whine.

Imagine if you were a Muslim in this day and age.

The Israelis and the Palestinians are ALL victims. The Israelis are victims of often cruel terrorism. The Palestinians are victims of an oppressive and violent, and equally as cruel, Israeli government. Only three or four times as many innocent, non-combatant Palestinians die in comparison to the numebr of Israelis who die.

You do not have a monopoly on being a victim.

You just don't appear to see innocent Palestinians as victims, because it doesn't seem as if you consider the possibility that Palestinians can be innocent. At least, you'd consider them guilty by association, and that's equally as bogus an assumption.
post #247 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by Tulkas
You are such a victim.

Yo, Nightcrawler,

Got a good laugh from your "talking points" on what you describe as revisionist history.

Regarding the 1967 Six Day War: Dude, a blockage (ie. Straits of Tiran) is an act of war. Get over it, also the Soviets supplied weapons/training to many Arab states, true they were not Soviet satellites, but the 60's - 80's was a showdown between USSR and USA technology/idealogy. Also I recommend you read a few MILITARY HISTORY BOOKS to get an unbiased, unpolitical account of 1948-49 (war of independence), 1956 war (GB,France, Israel), 1967 (Six day War), 1973 (Yom Kippur War)and more recent conflicts---honestly you make some good points, but you also put your foot in your mouth.

Regarding "occupied territories". This is a misnomer. There is no such thing as "Palestine", no state has ever existed. In fact, Palestine is not an arabic word (Filastine), was created by Roman Empire (cira 70 CE) to insult the defeated Jewish state rebellion and renamed Syria Palestina in reference to old Philestine population that occupied Ertz Israel, before the founding of the first Jewish commonwealth.
Also Ertz Israel (or historic Palestine 70 CE and on) was occupied by many a people: Jews, Romans, Arabs, Persians, Ottoman Empire, Egyptians....we can go on. Point is occupied territories is a relative word.
Besides Israel, the USA are the only nations to give up land to losers of military campaigns (if you are about to make the arguement for displaced people, I suggest you read post WWII history regarding millions of Germans that were forced to leave Poland, Austria,Czech.. that were not compensated by U.N. this was an issue to be resolved by the defeated country), this is how history works and how nation borders are created.

If you really want to get a good appreciation of the debacle of the entire Middle East, read the treaty of Versailles (ie post WWI) a good book is titled 1917. This really is the orgins of alot of Middle East Conflicts. Keep in mind the conflicts encompass more than Jew vs. Arab, but also Arab vs. Arab.

Also look at history maps of "historic Palestine", it is much bigger than just Ertz Israel...hum, can you say modern day Jordan....curious.

Also, the West Bank was annexed by Jordan after the 1948-49 war of independence. The Gaza Strip was annexed by Egypt, did the Palestinians complain about this, rise up and demand their own independent state? Ah the answer is no? Makes one wonder why, and Jordan/Egypt treated these people as second-class citizens and kept them in refugee camps instead of assimlating them into the respective countries. If you really think about it the Palestians are treated as pawns by the Arab world. The real objective of the Arab world is annihalation of the Jewish State and Pan-Arabism from N. Africa accross the entire Middle East. If the Arab world really wanted peace now and recent past, it would have happened already---Israel has always been willing to conceed land for true peace and establishment of diplomatic/economic relations with Arab Nations.
Look forward to your comments....
post #248 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Stop whining.

"Ooh, I'm Jewish, I'm such a victim. I'm so oppressed. Anti-semitism is everywhere."

Whine, whine.

Imagine if you were a Muslim in this day and age.

The Israelis and the Palestinians are ALL victims. The Israelis are victims of often cruel terrorism. The Palestinians are victims of an oppressive and violent, and equally as cruel, Israeli government. Only three or four times as many innocent, non-combatant Palestinians die in comparison to the numebr of Israelis who die.

You do not have a monopoly on being a victim.

You just don't appear to see innocent Palestinians as victims, because it doesn't seem as if you consider the possibility that Palestinians can be innocent. At least, you'd consider them guilty by association, and that's equally as bogus an assumption.

Get a clue.

I wasn't denying injustices happen all over the world to people of all religions. nightcrawler believes that ills that have ever befallen his people are to be blames on others. The entire world, led by the jews and the US have held them down and oppressed them.

All the hurt that has happened in the mulsim world can not be blamed on the Jews. Nor can it all be blamed on the US. I know you buy into that as it fits your world view, so perhaps that's why nightcrawl's obvious victim complex touches you so deeply.

Oh, btw, systematic and cutural anti-semitism is a pretty well documented phenomenom. I know you and nightcrawler believe this is only due to the jew-controlled world media, but it does actually exist. Your very sensitve statement above about whining jews is pretty telling. I can image you giving that speech in another setting. However, can you really say that my statement that nightcrawler is a victim isn't an acurrate description? He imagines a decades long, multination, jew-led conspiracy is responsible for all the oppression and other evils in the muslim world. Like I said..a victim. I know in your world view that if he hates jews, he must have a valid point, but really, get a clue.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #249 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by Tulkas
I know in your world view that if he hates jews, he must have a valid point, but really, get a clue.

I think it's you that needs to get a clue. Quit trying to argue if people are racist or not and argue about firing tank rounds into a crowd.

Speaking of which, even though it's true that Muslims in the ME have brought plenty of sorrow into their own lives, that doesn't excuse Israel for attacking them or the US of A for supporting Israel.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #250 of 260
Jews are not a race. They are members of a religion. A person of any race can be a Jew.
post #251 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
Jews are not a race. They are members of a religion. A person of any race can be a Jew.

Um... someone tell that to the settlers in the Occupied Territories claiming a historical right to 'ancestral' land.
post #252 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
Jews are not a race. They are members of a religion. A person of any race can be a Jew.

"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #253 of 260
This thread have a lot of content in it. Let expect that it won't die now \
post #254 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge

Do you not understand the difference?
post #255 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
Do you not understand the difference?

Scott, it's implied that this discussion has been about Semetic Jews. Surely you're smart enough to know that.
post #256 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by Scott
Do you not understand the difference?

Of course I do. You're just so shamefully shallow it's funny.
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
"Hearing a corrupt CEO like Cheney denigrate Edwards for being a trial lawyer is like hearing a child molester complain how Larry Flint is a pervert." -johnq
Reply
post #257 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by bunge
I think it's you that needs to get a clue. Quit trying to argue if people are racist or not and argue about firing tank rounds into a crowd.

Speaking of which, even though it's true that Muslims in the ME have brought plenty of sorrow into their own lives, that doesn't excuse Israel for attacking them or the US of A for supporting Israel.

um..mebbe you didn't notice, but it was tonton that mentioned race above. I simply said nightcrawler was a victim. Read his posts and tell me he doesn't come off with a very obvious victim complex.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #258 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by tonton
Scott, it's implied that this discussion has been about Semetic Jews. Surely you're smart enough to know that.

Oh that's right. And with the new neolib way of thinking the anti-Semitic Muslim Arabs can't be anti-Semites because they are Semites too.


If I could only be so clever.
post #259 of 260
Quote:
Originally posted by MacJoo
Yo, Nightcrawler,

Got a good laugh from your "talking points" on what you describe as revisionist history.

Regarding the 1967 Six Day War: Dude, a blockage (ie. Straits of Tiran) is an act of war. Get over it, also the Soviets supplied weapons/training to many Arab states, true they were not Soviet satellites, but the 60's - 80's was a showdown between USSR and USA technology/idealogy. Also I recommend you read a few MILITARY HISTORY BOOKS to get an unbiased, unpolitical account of 1948-49 (war of independence), 1956 war (GB,France, Israel), 1967 (Six day War), 1973 (Yom Kippur War)and more recent conflicts---honestly you make some good points, but you also put your foot in your mouth.

Regarding "occupied territories". This is a misnomer. There is no such thing as "Palestine", no state has ever existed. In fact, Palestine is not an arabic word (Filastine), was created by Roman Empire (cira 70 CE) to insult the defeated Jewish state rebellion and renamed Syria Palestina in reference to old Philestine population that occupied Ertz Israel, before the founding of the first Jewish commonwealth.
Also Ertz Israel (or historic Palestine 70 CE and on) was occupied by many a people: Jews, Romans, Arabs, Persians, Ottoman Empire, Egyptians....we can go on. Point is occupied territories is a relative word.
Besides Israel, the USA are the only nations to give up land to losers of military campaigns (if you are about to make the arguement for displaced people, I suggest you read post WWII history regarding millions of Germans that were forced to leave Poland, Austria,Czech.. that were not compensated by U.N. this was an issue to be resolved by the defeated country), this is how history works and how nation borders are created.

If you really want to get a good appreciation of the debacle of the entire Middle East, read the treaty of Versailles (ie post WWI) a good book is titled 1917. This really is the orgins of alot of Middle East Conflicts. Keep in mind the conflicts encompass more than Jew vs. Arab, but also Arab vs. Arab.

Also look at history maps of "historic Palestine", it is much bigger than just Ertz Israel...hum, can you say modern day Jordan....curious.

Also, the West Bank was annexed by Jordan after the 1948-49 war of independence. The Gaza Strip was annexed by Egypt, did the Palestinians complain about this, rise up and demand their own independent state? Ah the answer is no? Makes one wonder why, and Jordan/Egypt treated these people as second-class citizens and kept them in refugee camps instead of assimlating them into the respective countries. If you really think about it the Palestians are treated as pawns by the Arab world. The real objective of the Arab world is annihalation of the Jewish State and Pan-Arabism from N. Africa accross the entire Middle East. If the Arab world really wanted peace now and recent past, it would have happened already---Israel has always been willing to conceed land for true peace and establishment of diplomatic/economic relations with Arab Nations.
Look forward to your comments....

I've heard all those arguments before:
a) Palestine hasn't really existed any time in history..
b) The arabic states have lost wars against Israel, so they just need to swallow it and live on...
c) The arabic states treat the palestinian refuggees as second-class-citizens and don't allow them to assimilate...

Those arguments are all legitimate arguments and also true, but tell only half the story:

1. It doesn't matter if Palestine was once a country or not, if the palestinians had a national identity before 48/67 or not, it really is not important. The palestinians have lived in the areas that nowadays make up Israel, have owned land and homes and worked that land, so they have a right to it, regardless if they call themselves palestinians or not.
The israelis also didn't have a national identity before 48, they came from all over the world, the only thing they had in common was their jewish religion. That's why Israel is a jewish state and a jewish democracy, which is an important contrast to normal states/democracies which aren't specifically religioon-bound. What it means is that in Israel the jews are favoured by the law, it means from definition that muslims in Israel are second-class-citizens...
Actually the best solution for the conflict would have been if Israel had annexed the occupied areas Gaza, Westbank and Golan, but Israel didn't want that solution as long as the palestinians are still inside these occupied areas, as Israel would have to grant them the israelic nationality, and Israel would be in danger of losing its jewish character, when there are 5 million islamic palestinians becoming israelis, with voting and candidating-rights...
That is the reason why Israel has decided instead to uphold the occupation, thus having access to the water-ressources there and the ability to found settlements by expropriating land from the palestinians... without having to accept the palestinians as citizens..

2. Yes, the arabic states have lost wars espescially the one from 1948. But one has to remember three important things: a) The arabic states have just gained their independence from the colonists and had no time nor high-profile-support to build up their armies to modern-standards. b) Eventhough these arabic states have gained independence from the british and french troops, because Britain and France have lost most of their military power in the two worldwars, a new form of colonism was installed by the US: Supported families gained the power in their countries and worked from then on in the interest of the USA. c) The wars that happened were only slightly more than show-wars in order to satisfy the arabic masses and to convince them that their governments are not US-puppets. As an illustration of that serves the six-day-war in 67. Regardless of how superior the israelic army is regarding the arabic armies, if the arabic states were really interested in a war with Israel and if they were really not US-puppet-governments, they would have fought the war for years with Israel. Just look at the real war between Iraq and Iran, in which Iraq played the highly superior player against a seemingly weak Iran, and still the war lasted for years and was not won by Iraq.

3. Your last point about the arabic states being no better than Israel regarding the palestinians, that is partially true. But like I already said those are US-puppet-dictatorships having already problems oppressing/suppressing their own people and the palestinians are espescially interested in owning land with water-sources which is difficult to find for them in arabic countries that are mostly desert-land..
So, assimilation in highly populated yet small land stripes with water-sources isn't easy without provoking a massive uprise which would topple the US-puppet-dictatorships..

There's no jewish conspiracy, actually the jews themselves are just instrumentalised by US-interests, in order to create a US-neo-colonialism in the arabic countries where the important ressources are located including the oil. US-puppet-dictatorships complemented by a big US-military-base with the name Israel for the case that all arabic dictatorships are toppled by nationalistic or islamic movements ...

Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #260 of 260
Thread Starter 
Yawn...!!!

This a prime example of how this whole conflict is so locked.

The people sympathizing with Israel have their version. The ones who sympathize with the palestinian cause have their. We can quote websites and other sources for 15 more pages, but I doubt we'll have come one inch closer to agreeing.

History, like the events of today, is not objective. It's an object of interpretation. We have moved from a point where everybody (nearly) were all for the jewish cause, to a point where more an more people are starting to recognize that there are two parties in this conflict. That the palestinians also have their history and their cause. And that this history is also one of tragedy and oppression.

We can debate these wars all we like. Who started what and so on. There are no easy and 100% correct answers. It all boils down to our perception of who is the agressor and who is the victim.
At least I hope we can agree that both are a bit of both, right?

In 48, for example, You really can't on any historic basis claim that only one of the sides were the sole agressor. You might however feel that one side was more right, or more morally right, then the other. As your personal opinion. We can argue about BC as much as you want. It's certainly entertaining to a point, but it very easily turns nasty.

If we want to ever reach a lasting peace, we will have to look at the goals of both parties. The answer is to find a middleway in there somewhere. And to do this you have to disregard all fixed opinions of what the parties want.

Forget both "the arabs want to push the jews into the sea" and "the jews want a sionist state on all of palestinian land". Sure, there are people who think this stuff. They are not important. Those who want peace are the important people.
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Israeli army helicopter kills at least 20 protestors with missiles...