Iran war has started - Page 7  

I am so sorry - I did misremember. It was Gene Clean that I was thinking of and talking about.

http://forums.appleinsider.com/showt...r&pagenumber=2

I prostrate myself before you and ask forgiveness, my
only excuse is that I am currently heavily medicated.

True, I seem to remember me and you having disagreements on things.
Segovius, though, seems to be at least as anti-Israeli as John, but I could be wrong.

It's not me who says that Israel started all those wars - READ UP on some of the links I provided. Wether it be 'pre-emptive' (aggression) or plain ol' terrorism tactics, it was either pro-Israeli nationalist-terrorist groups that attacked the Brits first, and then Palestinian villages, or the Israeli state outright.

Do I think Israel is 100% wrong on each and every bad thing that happened there? Certainly not. But that still doesn't change the fact that they are (the state) a genocidial state that employs terrorism to fight a group of people that want it out of their land. Wether that group employs conventional or non-conventional means is a totally different discussion - what is clear is that Israel has the power to change something, and it's not doing anything except building walls and destroying homes and making people live in refugee camps.

If you think I'm an extremist because I oppose the politics of Israel and its anti-Palestinian campaigns, then so be it.

Now we have a trio-Geneclean, Segovius, JohnQ, hey and we can add new to the equation as well.
Rabid Anti-Israel and rabid Anti-American, quite a popular combo in those circles.

And the suicide bombings?
That shouldn't be discussed, right?

Why not? Just tell me why are they doing what they're doing, without cursing, swearing and other BS that people have come to expect from you, and we can discuss.

Otherwise, go away.

I didnt know you had virgin ears. In NY, this is the way we talk.

Why are they doing it? Are you justifying what they do? Sounds to me like you are.

And you call us one-sided on Israel's side? You are far more one-sided on the Palestinian side.

They have an excuse for just about any atrocity, right? Just as long as the vitcims are Israeli or American.

Well, this ain't fucking NY. In Chicago (where I am) people are far more civil when they discuss.


How so? Most of the wars I'm talking about have nothing to do with Palestinians. They're wars between various countries in the Middle East.



Not an excuse, but if you think about it, it's the only way they can react. Born in refugee camps, living in misery, with a little bit of propaganda, they are ready to do that shit if the need be. Now, why don't we think about dismantling those refugee camps, allowing these people to return to their homes (and when they do, let's not destroys their homes with buldozers, shall we?) - let's give them a state, a country they can call theirs - and let's see what they do.

I highly doubt they will continue to kill themselves and others if their legitimate needs are met. You keep people in refugee camps, living like animals, you expect them to react like animals as well. Action -> ReAction.

I seem to recall that you can be quite rude yourself.

Its the only way they can react? So to you trying to exterminate as many innocent people as possible is a just reaction?
I think we all see where you are coming from.

Their legitimate needs? Like having Israel dissapear?
Gee, how about they talk, and not kill. Hard to expect a successful peace process while one side is sending lunatics to kill your women and children.

How about you look at it from the Israeli side?
The vast majority of the public wants to swap land for peace.
Peace Process starts.
Israel gives up control of most towns to Palestinians.
During Peace Process israelis see terrorism that has never existed in Israel.
Peace Process still continues.
More Israeli's die a hideous, grusome death, women and children some of the main targets.
Peace Process continues, then Arafat turns down Israeli proposal that all dignitaries present, including from the US and Europe , thought for sure Arafat should have accepted.
Palestinians start rioting.
More Israelis killed by terrorists.
Israel finally retaliates.

Now, you would most likely prefer that the Israeli's just lie down and accept being slaughtered, but they are like any other country and any other people-they fight back. They defend themselves. And with an amazing amount of restraint.
With the firepower Israel has they could have obliterated the Palestinians.
Instead, they take small measures, trying to limit casualties to civilians and targeting the terrorists.

Israel should be commended, not given 100% blame for what is happening right now.

You're right. Palestinians are all vicious dogs and they all deserve to die, man women and child. Israelis are angels. They are above criticism. Any criticism of Israel means the critic is anti-Amer I mean rabid anti-American, rabid anti-Semite. Woof, woof, grr.

...

...

...




Oh....And the required question: "have you been to Palestinian areas"?

No? Oh, I guess you can't talk about it then either...using that earlier logic.

Just tell me when Israel offered the west bank to Jordan. I mean for common knowledge, it' pretty har to find on google...

How do you explain that there are 4 dead palestinian civilians to every dead israeli civilian during the last 5 years?

And where did i say that I want Palestinians to die?
I just want palestinians to stop killing Israelis.
If they stop, then Israel will have no reason to retaliate. See how that works?
Then, both sides can go back to discussing an end to the conflict.

I don't see why that is so difficult for you rabid anti-Israelis to understand.
Israeli's don't want to die in order to wage peace. Very understandeable.

Israel has to move its military through Palestinian towns to rout the terrorists. There are bound to be civilian casualties since the terrorists hide amongst the population.

If Israel let all their forces loose the numbers would be much higher.

It was pretty hard to find. I finally found it. See how nice I am to you?
Incidentally, if the Palestinians had agreed to Israel's plan, how better a world would we be living in now? Unfortunately Likud took power and that was that. I included Jordan's plan, etc also:

> Israels Jordanian Option

The question arose again in 1967 after Israel had occupied the West Bank and Gaza. The idea of settling the problem in association with Jordan was revived, this time by Israel, in order to resolve the issue, not with regard to the territory of Palestine that was reserved for the Arab State under the Partition Resolution as had been suggested by Count Bernadotte, but with regard only to the West Bank and Gaza. Such a plan was substantially based upon the political program of the Israeli Labor Party.

The motive is not generosity but is entirely selfish. If Israel were to absorb the territories occupied in 1967 and their Arab population of over a million and a half, the number of Palestinians, added to Israels present Arab-citizen population of 700,000, would comprise 40 per cent of Israels total population. This would dilute the Jewishness of Israel and would be in contradiction with the Zionist concept of a purely Jewish State. Moreover, with the higher Arab birthrate, non-Jews could within the foreseeable future become the majority of the population. Hence, by effecting a so-called compromise over the West Bank with Jordan under a peace treaty, Israel would achieve several objectives: It would get rid of a large number of Palestinians, obtain Arab ratification of its conquests, and liquidate the Palestine Question.

The above considerations, however, did not cause any concern to Menachem Begin who rejected the Jordanian Option after becoming Prime Minister of Israel in 1977. His policy was not to return to the Arabs a single inch of the West Bank. The annexation of the West Bank and Gaza, which he described as Judea and Samaria of biblical times, was his paramount objective, which he sought to achieve by the multiplication of Jewish settlements. The problem posed by the number of Palestinians could be settled by expulsion, apartheid (which is already in application) or, by the grant of autonomy to the Palestinians in municipal affairs in accordance with the Camp David formula. This has been the policy of the Likud in contradiction to the Israeli Labor Party.

_


Jordans Jordanian Option

A somewhat different Jordanian option was adopted as Jordans policy by King Hussein after the capture of the West Bank and Gaza by Israel in 1967. In an attempt to counter Israeli efforts to annex the occupied territories by the creation of settlements, King Hussein proposed on March 15, 1972 the unification of the west Bank and the east Bank of the Jordan in a United Arab Kingdom. The proposal was rejected by the Palestine Liberation Organization. Again on June 22, 1977, Jordan revived the proposal and suggested a federation between an autonomous West Bank of Palestine and an East Bank State of Jordan. The proposal was again rejected by the PLO.

When President Reagan offered his peace plan of Palestinian autonomy in association with Jordan in 1982, King Hussein seized the occasion to offer to the Palestinians a confederation between the West Bank and Jordan. This assumed the future establishment of a Palestinian State and was meant as a compromise between the Fez and Reagan plans. King Husseins proposal was discussed by the Palestine National Council at Algiers in February 1983. The principle of a Palestinian-Jordanian confederation was approved, but only on condition that each of the members of the federation was established as an independent state.<

_

ah, so I see, the offer was never made... So why did you say it was? hmm?

4 times higher? because of moving millitary through a town? you're joking right?

And explain this to me, Why are palestinian terrorist better at targeting israeli millitary, than the IDF is at targeting millitants? Since they are terrorists, why do they care?

The idea was broached with Jordan but never came to fruition because Jordan didnt think Arafat would ever accept it, so they declined.
After Begin came to power that was the end of it.

The terrorists are targeting CIVILIANS. All the suicide bombing targets are CIVILIANS.

The terrorists target civilians, Israel targets terrorists.
If Israel targeted civilians the carnage would be unbelievable.
As it stands the numbers are where i would expect them to be.

Would any other country react any differently than Israel has?
Do you expect Israel not to retaliate at all?
Come on

Because the israeli military are wearing uniforms, and it is much easier to figure out who to shoot if they have a uniform on?

They also target the military only at checkpoints. Pretty hard not to find them since they are the only ones there.

What new fails to mention is that the terrorists send in suicide bombers to only kill civilians. They find targets that contain as many innocent men, women, and children as they can find.

new has strange friends.

Neither would the israeli public, not then anyway.

So why did you say they made the offer? Did you forget that they didn't or did you lie on purpose?

So since about half of the dead israelis are millitary, where they not killed by terrorists then?

The Israeli public back then would have accepted it, I believe. Israel became more right wing as time went on. Labor was dominant for a long time in the Govmnt.

I said they made the offer because they did. Israel and Jordan have had secret negotiations for decades. Israel came up with the plan, Labor offered it to Jordan. Jordan refused.

Are you always this dense? No need to respond, I already know the answer.

Why don't you stop the namecalling and address the issue you twat.

You claim the palestinians are terrorist and the israels are just fighting back,

yet the statistics show that palestinian are targeting the millitary just as often as the are civilians, while israel kills 4 civilians for every "militant/terrorist".

And there are far, far more dead palestininas than israelis.

How can you continue to view the israelis as the victims in the light of these numbers...?

You told me that I lied on purpose, asswipe. You want to get nasty I will get nasty. We are all addressing the issue and you are refusing to admit that you're wrong.
Of course there are more dead Palestinians, the terrorists hide among the general population. The only way to get to them is to have some collateral damage. Include the suicide bomber in those numbers by the way.

The Israelis are responding to violence, they arent creating it.
Reep what you sow. The Palestinians are getting it right back at them.

The FACT is NO SUCH OFFER WAS EVER MADE... There have been tons of speculations, plans, half-negotioations and ideas on how to solve the conflict during the years. But It's quite importent to separate speculation or plans from actual policy.

Edit for content and insults.

I don't think I did. I asked you If you where sure of your fact, or lying on purpose. Right now it seems like the latter is the case. But you can still try to act civilized.

Listen you _______, how do you think I heard about the offer in the first place?
Then, I take the time to find a link and it says the same thing I said. I didn't read in the paper that israel was 'considering' the plan because noone would have known what Israel was thinking. It came out in the paper that they had offered the idea to Jordan and they turned it down, get it?

Do you want me to drag the King's remains out of the ground, clone him, and get him to tell you it happened before you believe it?

Jesus H. Christ, you are thick headed.

Fine, then I will remove the word i used to describe you from my last post. Satisfied?

Ok, I'll help you. You are probably refering to the so-called "allon plan". Which was never about giving the west bank to jordan, but only putting the most populated arab-areas under jordanian control, while keeping the jordan valley and roads to the dead sea under israeli mllitary control. It was the "allon-plan" that lay the basis of many of the illegal settlements in the west bank. And of-course jordan would have nothing to do with such a deal. (if it had ever come so far in negotiations).

here's a map, next time do some proper research first.

The plan I referred to was drafted shortly after the 1967 war.
The allon plan that you mention refers to settlements built in 1970.

The Allon plan was drafted in July 67, The settlements the plan called for (to secure the border) obviously came in the years after the plan.

(A sharp eye will see that the allon plan is quite similar to the situation today. The big difference being the wall stealing land from the west as well and cutting the northern enclave in two, physically separating Nablus and Ramallah.)

double post.

I don't see retaliation as mandatory. Especially when it goes against your own beliefs.

But this assumes one's beliefs are more than just mere hollow words...

steve666: it appears to this observer that after calling New an 'asswipe', an 'imbecile', 'dense' and 'thickheaded', he has comprehensively OWNED you.

And it's really really funny!

who lock me?

PERSONAL ATTACKS!